Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

Many Dead In Virginia Tech Shooting

Posted by CmdrTaco on Mon Apr 16, 2007 03:19 PM
from the funny-not-appropriate dept.
nexuspal writes "Over 20 confirmed dead at Virginia Tech. Shooter killed some at residence hall then two hours later killed others in classrooms. Worst school shooting in US history. "

Related Stories

[+] Your Rights Online: Webcomic Author Deemed a Terrorist Threat 486 comments
CaptainCarrot writes "Writer/IT contractor Matt Boyd, formerly the man who made up the words for webcomic Mac Hall and who now does the same for his and Ian McConville's new comic Three Panel Soul, was recently fired from his government job. His conversation with a co-worker about a gun he intended to buy for target shooting was overheard by someone in a nearby cubicle. As it was unfortunately the day of the Virginia Tech shootings, the eavesdropper panicked and reported him to management. That was bad enough. But when he used the comic to document the meeting where the reason for his firing was explained, he was visited by representatives of local law enforcement investigating him on suspicion of making a "terroristic threat" using the Internet. No charges have been filed. Yet. FLEEN interviewed Matt about the incident."
[+] Games: Games Had Nothing To Do With V. Tech Shooting 99 comments
GamesIndustry.biz is reporting that an inquiry into the Virginia Tech shooting in April of this year has revealed no connection whatsoever to videogames. The shooter's lack of interest in violent gaming was widely reported among game news sites at that time in the year, despite the exploration of the idea on cable television news. The official report, filed with the governor of the state, lays that 'motive' to rest. From the article: "The report, which includes a mental health history of the shooter, Seung Hui Cho, notes that during his childhood he had 'played videogames like Sonic the Hedgehog,' yet 'none of the videogames were war games or had violent themes.' This flies in the face of statements made on Fox TV news by Jack Thompson in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy, which laid the blame for the incident firmly at the door of videogames."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Many Dead In Virginia Tech Shooting 50 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.
  • 31 dead, 20 wounded. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Southpaw018 (793465) * on Monday April 16 2007, @03:22PM (#18755113) Homepage Journal
    See headline. Check favorite news outlets, or see the developing story, including people monitoring scanners, several students posting live in the thread, and people grappling with the various sources of information in this [fark.com] Fark thread.
  • My sincerest condolences (Score:5, Insightful)

    by photomonkey (987563) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:22PM (#18755117)

    I was at the University of Arizona Nursing School shootings in 2001, and know what the folks over at VTech are going through.

    My thoughts are with you, your loved ones and for this world, which every day seems to spin more out of control.

  • More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

    by treeves (963993) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:22PM (#18755123) Homepage Journal
    Worst shooting spree of *any* kind. 31 dead, latest count. How he got away with it again, two hours later, is a question many will be asking.
      • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:39PM (#18755515)

        He got away with it *both* times because the law emasculates the citizen from carrying a weapon at all times. If there were no restrictions on concealed carry, more people would carry. If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.

        Christ, can't you shut up with this shit for a day? If morons carried guns everywhere, we'd have many more than 31 killed in spontaneous acts of stupidity every day. There are people who I would generally trust to be around while they carry weapons, but I would not extend that trust of judgement to more than about 5% of the general population. Most of the rest are too damned stupid or impulsive.

        In the absence of meaningful regulation of who gets guns - which people like you have fought vehemently against - sane people like me simply don't trust being around any number of idiots with guns. If you want more of society to accept the wisdom of having armed citizens around, you'll have to convince us that there's some method of keeping them in the right hands - which clearly did NOT happen today.

        [ Parent ]
          • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Nos. (179609) <andrew&thekerrs,ca> on Monday April 16 2007, @03:56PM (#18755971) Homepage

            it's wrong to deprive the good guys of the means to defend themselves

            Hate to use your own argument against you but, "Your argument is based on a specious assumption". That is to say that you can only speculate that it would be better (or at least no worse) if some|many|all of the students at staff at Virginia Tech were carrying weapons.

            Think for a minute about the chaos that a few shots fired in a school would cause. Now, imagine that a bunch of people suddenly pull out handguns and start looking for the original shooter. I see a lot of problems with this situation.

            [ Parent ]
          • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Mr. Underbridge (666784) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:00PM (#18756089)

            Clearly you missed the point that criminals, by definition, do not obey the laws. There is some logic to that whole "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" motto. It's a truism. Gun laws shift the balance of power in favor of those who don't give a shit about the law.

            That relies on 2 things: 1) that there is a distinction between good guys and bad guys, and 2) that good guys are good shots. For the first, many (to that point) honest citizens commit "heat of the moment" crimes, which would certainly be made worse with the presence of guns. The second creates problems when well meaning laypeople start playing hero and injure bystanders.

            What you're trying to convince people is that a device, whose sole purpose is to maim and kill, should be allowed to be carried in public by anyone, without demonstrating 1) basic competency or 2) psychological dependability. Forget that.

            I'm not one of the crazies on either side, but if we have to have licenses for cars, we need licenses for guns. And I'm not interested in the BS slippery slope rhetoric. I'm OK with highly trained civillians carrying guns in public. I'm OK with idiot yokels having guns locked up at home that they use for hunting or target practice. I'm not OK with idiot yokels carrying guns in public. It's not safe.

            If you're in favor of licensing, background investigations, testing, and registration, then I'm OK with concealed permit licensing. Until then, no thanks.

            [ Parent ]
      • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

        by eln (21727) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:41PM (#18755579)
        It's interesting that a couple of threads above this comment, people rail on Jack Thompson for using this tragedy to push his own personal agenda, and then you come in and do exactly the same thing and get applauded for it.

        Would guns on campus have prevented more people from getting shot? Who the hell knows? Maybe it would have meant several people trying to play hero and causing even more casualties by shooting wildly in the direction of the gunman. It's just idle speculation. The real question here is how a 911 call about shots fired gets to police at 7:15am and the same gunman (apparently) is allowed to come in and shoot up another building on the same campus TWO HOURS LATER with no police presence.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Informative)

          by OverlordQ (264228) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:51PM (#18755855) Journal
          Would guns on campus have prevented more people from getting shot? Who the hell knows? Maybe it would have meant several people trying to play hero and causing even more casualties by shooting wildly in the direction of the gunman.

          To get a CCP in the vast majority of states you have to show you are proficient in handling a firearm. I can't speak for other states, but the people who can pass a CCP exam aren't the type that will be shooting wildly.
          [ Parent ]
        • Worked at the University of Texas (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Quila (201335) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:52PM (#18755889)

          Would guns on campus have prevented more people from getting shot? Who the hell knows?
          Very likely. Not long after Charles Whitman started shooting people at the University of Texas in 1966 a lot of locals showed up to help provide suppressive fire with their rifles. That forced Whitman to keep his head down, and he could no longer shoot freely as he had done earlier. This was kept up until two people (one an armed civilian) managed to get to the top of the tower and shoot Whitman.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Worked at the University of Texas (Score:5, Insightful)

            by eln (21727) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:07PM (#18756305)
            At Texas, there was a gunman sitting way up in a tower all by himself. It was easy to identify what to shoot at. In this case, if someone saw the gunman and started shooting, you could have ended up with someone else coming in later and shooting at the wrong person. In this case, no one knew what the gunman looked like or where he was, and the gunman was moving. There would be a much higher risk of "friendly fire" casualties in this case. It's not like the bad guys have devil horns and the civilians carrying weapons have halos so you know what to shoot at.

            So I stand by my original statement that trying to push a gun rights agenda on this discussion is pointless and disgusting, as there is no way to tell how having more guns around would have affected (for better or worse) this particular situation. Not to mention it's despicable to push any sort of political agenda on a tragedy like this, particularly so soon after the fact.
            [ Parent ]
          • Re:Worked at the University of Texas (Score:5, Insightful)

            by YGingras (605709) <ygingras@ygingras.net> on Monday April 16 2007, @04:08PM (#18756347) Homepage
            But, if everyone is free to jump in with his own gun, how does the improvised sniper tell the improvised tactical ops from the real mad gunman? Real tactical ops have a really tight communication channel to minimize the probability of errors. I sure would not feel safe if my life was protected by a trigger happy random snipper. The world is much better without vigilantes. Didn't we learn since the lynchings?
            [ Parent ]
        • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

          by steveha (103154) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:04PM (#18756219) Homepage
          Would guns on campus have prevented more people from getting shot? Who the hell knows? Maybe it would have meant several people trying to play hero and causing even more casualties by shooting wildly in the direction of the gunman. It's just idle speculation.

          Actually, if you check the statistics, armed citizens have a better record than the police do of only shooting the actual bad guy. This is mostly because the police come on the scene late and need to figure out who the bad guy is; a citizen on the scene who witnesses the bad guy in action knows who the bad guy is. And responsible adults don't lightly pull out guns, especially if they have had good training.

          I believe that if armed citizens trying to play hero caused even more casualties, that would be big news, carried by all the mainstream media. (If someone shoots a bunch of students, that's big news; if a citizen shoots someone by mistake, that's big news; and if a citizen stops a bad guy before he can shoot a bunch of people, that's local-interest news only. You never see a headline like "local man heroically stops gunman at school"; it's more like "local man shoots teen", and it goes downhill from there if the local man is white and the gunman isn't.) Anyway, I cannot recall seeing any news stories like this.

          The real question here is how a 911 call about shots fired gets to police at 7:15am and the same gunman (apparently) is allowed to come in and shoot up another building on the same campus TWO HOURS LATER with no police presence.

          That's just horrible. But it is an example that you can't count on the police to protect you. In general, the police do their best, and lapses like the above are rare; but it remains true that you can't count on the police to protect you.

          steveha
          [ Parent ]
      • by mosel-saar-ruwer (732341) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:48PM (#18755767)

        He got away with it *both* times because the law emasculates the citizen from carrying a weapon at all times.

        And it was the Hokie adminstration that led the charge to dis-arm the students and the faculty:

        Gun bill gets shot down by panel
        Tuesday, January 31, 2006

        ...Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus"...

        http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658 [roanoke.com]

        [ Parent ]
      • Re:More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Coryoth (254751) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:52PM (#18755875) Homepage Journal

        He got away with it *both* times because the law emasculates the citizen from carrying a weapon at all times. If there were no restrictions on concealed carry, more people would carry. If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.
        You're playing with hypotheticals here. It is certainly conceivable that, if a large number of VT students were all carrying concealed weapons that, when the shooting broke out, someone would have shot the nutcase. On the other hand it is conceivable that, if a large number of VT students were all carrying concealed weapons, there may have been a number of accidental or mistaken shootings at the same time.

        Consider: you are carrying a concealed weapon and you hear gunfire coming from the room down the hall (or maybe from the floor below). You draw your weapon, and the next thing you know someone carrying a gun walks into the room. Is it another student from elsewhere in the building responding to the gunfire, or the nutcase? Do you shoot them before they can shoot you? Now add plenty of screaming and panic, and multiply this scenario by the number of different panicked scared students all carrying firearms.

        To my mind each case (the nutcase getting shot, and a anumber of innocent students getting shot) seems equally reasonable, so given that the whole thing is purely hypothetical can you really claim, with any certainty, that lots of students carrying guns would have saved lives? I don't see that that is clear at all.
        [ Parent ]
      • YEAH MAN (Score:5, Insightful)

        by rantingkitten (938138) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:05PM (#18756233) Homepage
        Guns make people safer! That's why America, with the highest guns per capita [csmonitor.com] of any first-world nation, is the safest nation on Earth [nationmaster.com], right alongside such sterling examples of crime-free zones like Costa Rica and Colombia.

        Get a goddamned grip. The US has more guns -- and more gun deaths -- than any other developed nation [medicinenet.com].

        Clearly the solution to today's situation would have been for everyone to have guns, then people could have started firing recklessly into the fray and that would have been really fucking great!
        [ Parent ]
  • ALREADY Jack Thompson blames games (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Apocalypse111 (597674) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:23PM (#18755139) Journal
    In case anyone has missed it, Jack Thompson has already gone on the major news networks predicting that the shooter's computer will have Counterstrike installed.

    How the hell does Jacko correlate the skill of properly aiming and discharging a firearm with moving a thumbstick and pressing a button on a control-pad? There is no link there!

    Listen Jack, just because your addled mind cannot disassociate video games from reality doesn't mean that the rest of us can't either. For fuck sake, the bodies aren't even COLD yet, we have no idea who the shooter is, and already you're exploiting this situation to try to push your illogical and ultimatly incorrect agenda?

    You are a sick, sick man Jacko. Human filth. The only person worse than you in this situation is the shooter, but at least he had the decency to get killed.

    My heart goes out to the victims of this tragedy, but right now I can't help but feel only rage at the baseless lies and unabashed opportunism displayed by this man.
    • by Badgerman (19207) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:26PM (#18755209)
      I'm seeing a lot of people making political hay out of this already. Really, can't we let the bodies get cold?

      Though this is what we can expect in a mass media age. Here we are, on Slashdot, already discussing it when they're still counting the dead.

      But I'm glad there is a place to discuss it. I have friends in the area, I know people who went to the colleges there. It's really freaky.
      [ Parent ]
    • by Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:37PM (#18755477)
      Ooh, ooh, can I get on TV predicting how the shooter's computer has Microsoft Word installed on it? I'm more likely to be right.
      [ Parent ]
  • by Badgerman (19207) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:24PM (#18755157)
    Have some friends in the area, so our usual gang was trying to figure out what was up.

    From what I heard they put all schools in the county into lockdown when the attack was detected - not just college campuses. The gunman is apparently dead, but obviously everyone is extremely nervous.

    Apparently the campus had had bomb threats in the last two weeks. No idea if they're connected:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18134671/ [msn.com]

    My thoughts are with the lost and their loved ones.

  • As horrifying as this is... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TomatoMan (93630) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:33PM (#18755371) Homepage Journal
    As horrifying as this sickening act of violence is, it's sobering to recognize that this kind of random death toll is practically a daily event in Baghdad. We should be equally shocked and horrified by that.

    Thoughts and prayers for all victims of violence.
      • Re:As horrifying as this is... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Abcd1234 (188840) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:07PM (#18756313) Homepage
        And you think this guy "randomly" went to the university and started shooting? I'm sure he had a plan in his mind when he started out. That doesn't make the violence any more senseless, or the GP's point any more salient.

        The fact is, in both cases, innocent civilians are being killed, but here in the west, if something like this happens, the event is met with horror and outrage. Why? Because it's close. Because it's not supposed to happen here. But it's different in Baghdad because, as we all know, Iraq is a third-world hell hole populated by murderous, religious fanatics that we don't care to understand.
        [ Parent ]
  • gun control comments (Score:5, Insightful)

    by codepunk (167897) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:40PM (#18755541) Homepage
    I see a lot of gun control comments already...I am interested, what is your solution?

    As I recall it only took a couple of guys with some simple box cutters to kill 3000+ people, so what would
    a gun ban do?
  • by pario (675744) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:40PM (#18755561)
    Every time a news of shooting breaks out, I always wonder why the possession of firearms is not banned entirely in this country. I am native of Japan, and where I grew up nobody but cops were allowed to carry guns. I live in New Jersey now, and I really miss a sense of security I used to have back home. Back there I never worried about getting killed and such, whereas I feel physically threatened where I live now since there have been a number of incidents of armed robberies on campus at Rutgers and in my neighborhood. (My own apartment was robbed several years ago, too.) Seriously, it makes a huge difference when I have to take into consideration the possibility of the possession of firearms when some strangers attacked me. I am aware that there are gun lobbies working against the ban of firearms, but it never made any sense to me. Could anybody enlighten me as to why people want to carry guns at all?
    • Every time a news of shooting breaks out, I always wonder why the possession of firearms is not banned entirely in this country. I am native of Japan, and where I grew up nobody but cops were allowed to carry guns. I live in New Jersey now, and I really miss a sense of security I used to have back home. Back there I never worried about getting killed and such, whereas I feel physically threatened where I live now since there have been a number of incidents of armed robberies on campus at Rutgers and in my neighborhood. (My own apartment was robbed several years ago, too.) Seriously, it makes a huge difference when I have to take into consideration the possibility of the possession of firearms when some strangers attacked me. I am aware that there are gun lobbies working against the ban of firearms, but it never made any sense to me.

      Because in this country we - historically - believe in certain inalienable rights of all men; and that includes - in addition to the phrase "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness" - the idea that individuals (or groups of individuals joined together for a common good) can defend those rights, using violence if necessary. Now no sane person *wants* violence or war, or bloodshed, but our Founding Fathers acknowledged that sometimes you have to choose to utilized armed forced in order to defend your "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Case in point, the US Revolutionary War.

      And to this day, US citizens generally understand that if the government ever becomes tyrannical and repressive, "we the people" have the right (and must have the means) to overthrow it.

      Could anybody enlighten me as to why people want to carry guns at all?

      Because there is no way to prevent crazy nuts like this guy from VT from getting guns. And some people want to be able to defend themselves when these nuts show up and start shooting.
      [ Parent ]
    • by fiannaFailMan (702447) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:03PM (#18756161) Journal
      Michael Moore's 'Bowling for Columbine' documentary looked into this and didn't actually blame the ready availability of guns in the US for the high level of gun crime. He showed examples of other countries where lots of people carry guns, such as Canada and Switzerland, countries that don't have such a culture of violence. He claims that a culture of fear is what drives Americans to arm themselves to the teeth in such big numbers, and you end up with the ludicrous situation where you can go into a shop on just about any high street and buy an automatic assault weapon, something that is not needed for self defence or hunting or any of the other uses that gun advocates frequently come up with.

      There seems to be a cultivation of fear, where violent crime seems to get a disproportionate amount of coverage on the news that's way beyond the actual importance of it. So there was an armed robbery at the gas station earlier this morning. Do we really need a live outside broadcast from the scene of the crime at 7pm where all the activity has long finished?

      On the radio this morning someone made a very good point about people in their neighbourhood driving their children the short distance to school for fear of abduction, even though the number of abductions in that area in the last ten years is zero. TV shows talk about an 'epidemic' of road rage, an epidemic being five reported incidents in the country in the last year. Remember the SARS outbreak? About five people in Asia died from it and it was reported as a 'worldwide pandemic.'

      I don't know if gun control is the complete solution to the problem, it runs much deeper than that, but it has to be part of it. There's no way any random person should be able to walk in off the street and buy an AK47.
      [ Parent ]
  • Why Did He Do It? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by blueZhift (652272) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:42PM (#18755609) Homepage Journal
    I suppose the usual gun control debates will ensue, along with the bashing of video games. But none of that really matters. The real question is why did this guy shoot all of these people? What made him so angry/hopeless that he felt the need to commit this mass murder? And the more chilling question in my mind is, why doesn't this sort of thing happen more often? There's a lot of pain and ugliness in the world, more than enough to produce thousands, if not millions of shooters. And perhaps therein lies the hope. As bad as things can be, they haven't reached the point where these mass shootings happen every day. Will we be wise enough to do the things we really need to do to prevent this from happening again?
  • At VT Duing Shooting (Score:5, Informative)

    by thoolie (442789) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:43PM (#18755643) Homepage
    During the shootings, a conference was being held at the VT Inn for the Center of Power Electronic Systems for RPI, NC A&T, VT, and the UW - Madison. We had a mandatory lecture at the main conference hall in at the Inn at 8:00am. Right as we were finishing the lecture, we were told that there had been a "security breach" and that the Inn was now in lock-down and that we should stay away from the doors and windows. As it turns out, as we were exiting the conference room, the final shots were being fired not more than 200 yards away (oddly, in the same complex that we were to give presentations in tomorrow - the engineering complex).

    Many of the VT CPES students and faculty could have been in the vicinity of the shootings had it not been for this conference today (as it was an engineering hall that the main shootings took place). We were also asked to evacuate from the main conference room so that the university could hold its press conference.

    This is quite a surreal experience as I'm watching the news and they are showing picture of what's going on outside my hotel room. The CPES students, faculty, and staff are all safe.

    Words can not express the atmosphere here. It is the most surreal experience of my life.
  • Virginia Tech not to blame (Score:5, Insightful)

    by daveschroeder (516195) * <(das) (at) (doit.wisc.edu)> on Monday April 16 2007, @03:44PM (#18755677) Homepage
    When what is believed to be a single, isolated shooting in a dorm happens on a 2600 acre public, open campus with hundreds of buildings, you can't assume that you're about to have the worst shooting incident (of any type) in US history.

    Yet, people are already blaming Virginia Tech.

    Would we close or "lock down" a city of 40000 people if there was a shooting? Because that's exactly what a campus of this size and type is (including students and faculty/staff).

    No, but people are already calling for siren/PA systems in EVERY of HUNDREDS of buildings, of varying ages and constructions, centralized door locking/control and camera systems for not just outer building doors, but ALL doors.

    The University reacted in a reasonable way. Yes, a shooter was "on the loose". Someone who had shot a person in a dorm, and the University immediately sent out notifications that such an event occurred; to be cautious and aware, and to report any suspicious activity to campus police. The area was "locked down", but after over two hours elapsed, there was no reason to believe that a madman was about to go on a random killing spree across campus.

    This is not an elementary school. This is not a high school. This is a massive, open research campus with tens of thousands of people spreading over 2600 acres, with private, residential, and other buildings intermixed.

    The only person to be blamed here is the shooter. And yes, he's dead. But Virginia Tech is not at fault.
    • Re:Go go Jack Thompson (Score:5, Informative)

      by Southpaw018 (793465) * on Monday April 16 2007, @03:25PM (#18755173) Homepage Journal
      He was on Fox around 3:15 Eastern (I think. Time may be off), almost in tears talking about how HL2, GTA, and the others prepared the guy for violence - notwithstanding his name hasn't even been released yet.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Go go Jack Thompson (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Hijacked Public (999535) * on Monday April 16 2007, @03:35PM (#18755457)
        Every talking head with an agenda will use this.


        Jack Thompson will blame video games, Jerry Falwell will blame gay marriage, Rosie O'Donnel will say it is the proliferation of guns, Rush Limbaugh will tell us that this is the inevitable result of a a Democrat majority. This is how these people get their faces on TV.

        I don't even think it is seen as grotesque by most people any more.

        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Go go Jack Thompson (Score:5, Informative)

          by YrWrstNtmr (564987) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:09PM (#18756379)
          I think that the point is: how the hell could be so easy for anybody to get such arsenal?!

          ABC is reporting that it was 2 semi-automatic pistols. Hardly an asrenal.
          [ Parent ]
    • Re:Gaming (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 16 2007, @03:28PM (#18755239)
      Jack Thompson was already on the news blaming it on video games. What a sick fuck. Using this horror to advance his personal agenda. What a sick, sick human being.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Gaming (Score:5, Insightful)

      by harrkev (623093) <kevin.harrelson@com> on Monday April 16 2007, @04:00PM (#18756091) Homepage

      I really hope they don't find any way to blame this on video games, like most school shootings.
      Don't worry. There will be a whole host of people who will blame this on just about everything you can imagine. Some of the likely targets will be:
      • Computer games
      • Music of some sort
      • Lack of gun control
      • Religion
      • Lack of religion
      • Educational system
      • Lack of mental-health counseling
      • If the person turns out to be an engineering student, expect blame to fall on H1B visas for providing too much competition for local engineers
      • If the person turns out to be foreign, I can imagine a whole slew of others to blame
      In short, blame everything/everybody except the person who did the deed. Personal responsibility is not even a concept in America any more.
      [ Parent ]
        • Re:Gaming, no (Score:5, Interesting)

          by vertinox (846076) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:05PM (#18756247) Homepage
          Did the gun sprout legs and arms and go beserk??

          No, but out of curiosity I wonder what kind of weapon and or training the person had. This is the highest body count any mass murder has had on a rampage in the states.

          The only higher World Wide (at least so far) was the Port Arthur Massacre [wikipedia.org] with 35 deaths who used an AR-10 rifle.

          I'm not pro or anti gun, but you simply can't go on a mass murdering spree like this with a knife or a bow and arrow.
          [ Parent ]
    • Re:Get ready... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by database_plumber (734219) on Monday April 16 2007, @04:01PM (#18756107) Journal
      Yeah, great. Let's visit this alternative reality for a minute. Word goes out that a 'young guy with a handgun' is wandering around campus killing people. In response, all these students break out their handguns and start popping off at anyone matching that description. Hilarity ensues.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Get ready... (Score:5, Informative)

        by mwhahaha (172475) <mwhahaha&vt,edu> on Monday April 16 2007, @03:31PM (#18755319) Homepage
        http://www.judicial.vt.edu/upsl.php [vt.edu]

        10. Fireworks/Explosives/Hazardous Chemicals/Weapons
        Unauthorized possession or use of fireworks, explosives, or weapons is prohibited. Hazardous chemicals that could pose a health risk are also prohibited from the campus, including chemicals that, when combined with other substances, could be hazardous or present a danger to others.

        Unauthorized possession, storage (in vehicles on campus as well as in the residence halls), or control of firearms and weapons on university property is prohibited. (NOTE: Organizational weapons of the Virginia Tech Corps of Cadets, approved by the commandant, are not prohibited by this policy.) Firearms are defined as any gun, rifle, pistol, or handgun designed to fire bullets, BBs, pellets, or shots (including paint balls), regardless of the propellant used. Other weapons are defined as any instrument of combat or any object not designed as an instrument of combat but carried for the purpose of inflicting or threatening bodily injury. Examples include (but are not limited to) knives with fixed blades or pocket knives with blades longer than four inches, razors, metal knuckles, blackjacks, hatchets, bows and arrows, nun chahkas, foils, or any explosive or incendiary device. Possession of realistic replicas of weapons on campus is prohibited. Students who store weapons in residence hall rooms, who brandish weapons, or who use a weapon in a reckless manner may face disciplinary action which may include suspension or dismissal from the university.

        Refer to Section V.W. for additional information about Weapons.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:slashdot? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by gregmark (750089) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:31PM (#18755325)
        Er.. aren't there some stories that transcend the typical boundaries of the Slashdot? What did we do on 9/11? The fallout of this event will affect student civil liberties all over America. Once the "we gotta do *something*" people take over, it's going to get spectacularly ugly. After they find his My Space page, this might even become a YRO issue. This is *very* relevant.
        [ Parent ]
    • Re:Beyond words... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Harmonious Botch (921977) * on Monday April 16 2007, @04:11PM (#18756449) Homepage Journal

      What fucked up animals we are.
      No. What fucked-up animals a teeny minority of us are. Most of us are better than that. You are. I am.
      Let's give ourselves credit where it is deserved. There's probably not a person on this list who hasn't wanted to do multiple homicides now and then. But we don't. We learn to control our anger, to seek non-violent solutions.
      Let's treat this incident as a baseline, and praise ourselves for having advanced well beyond it. This guy was an exception, not the norm.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Beyond words... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by RexRhino (769423) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:32PM (#18755357)
        What is wrong is that the guy is insane. You can't understand what he did because (presumably) you are not insane. The brain is a machine, and in some people the machine goes haywire.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Beyond words... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MeanderingMind (884641) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:50PM (#18755807) Homepage Journal
        There are any number of reasons, and they are all very real.

        For example, imagine that suddenly your dear and loving parents split apart violently. Your once placid and happy life is sundered apart. Instead of caring, your friends (if you're lucky enough have any) shrug it off. They might have gone through divorce and think it's much ado about nothing or perhaps they simply don't understand.

        Meanwhile life only gets worse. It isn't just that no one understands, no one wants to. No one makes the effort to connect and communicate, or not enough people do. You only get to watch as everyone around them appears happy and complacent. They're having fun, playing games, living normal lives and crying about silly things like how their boyfriend dumped them. Boohoo, your soul is only tearing itself apart and no one notices.

        The wound festers, and before long you hate everyone and everything. They're is so happy like sheep, ignorant and uncaring about the injustices that go on around them. They don't fucking care, so long as they get to have their stupid, superficial relationships and screw each other while others suffer. They're more than willing to spend $15 a month on some remote child in africa but to actually lift a finger themselves, too hard for the bastards.

        Demons all of them. They're talking about you behind your back. They're pointing you out, you're the weirdo. The anti-social ass who chased away all those fuckers who were your "friends". No one wants anything to do with you, or doesn't know you're unclean. You practically don't even exist in the feeble minds of these bitches. Some socially disfigured leper.

        Damn those fuckers to hell. You play nice, you're a "primadonna" because you had a nervous breakdown when your parents split. You play rough, and you're a lowlife scumfuck without the sophistication to breed. Fuck'em all and their social games. They'll see. You'll wake them up and they'll see. They'll see themselves for the compassionless, stupid fucks they are. Yeah, it'll be sweet.

        Is that how this happened? Probably not. However, it's suprising how quickly good people can go bad when there's no one willing or able to support them.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Beyond words... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Sancho (17056) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:50PM (#18755819) Homepage
        I'm against the war, and I consider shootings like this abhorrent. I cannot, however, figure out how a person could link these situations without referring to either karma (which I don't believe is generally thought to be linked to nations), the deity of your choice (e.g. the people who thought that Katrina was God's judgement over homosexuality), or a direct quote from the killer explaining that his actions are trying to make this point.

        Use logic to make your arguments. Don't try to claim that these two awful situations are linked in some way to sway people to your side.
        [ Parent ]


    • And still you fight for your right to bear arms
      (Score:2, Offtopic)
      Take this as (another) wake up call. Vote for the candidate that promise to reform your gun control laws in '08.


      Yeah, existing laws - making it illegal to walk on campus with a gun and shoot 30+ people - really did a lot of good, no? What makes you think passing more laws is going to help?

      Something like this actually makes me MORE determined than ever to fight for my 2nd Amendment rights. You can do whatever the fuck you want if some nut with a gun shows up and starts trying to kill you, but I want to be able to defend myself. I may not succeed, but at least I won't go out cowering under a desk, praying to a god that does not exist, that the killer won't find me.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Federal Sources Cite 31 Dead Now (Score:5, Informative)

      by toleraen (831634) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:40PM (#18755563)
      From what I've been reading they did lock down the campus to a point. After the first shooting they told everyone to stay inside, away from windows, etc etc. They just couldn't get to this sick @#$* in time.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Hear, hear (Score:5, Interesting)

        by FleaPlus (6935) on Monday April 16 2007, @03:43PM (#18755651) Homepage Journal
        I'm actually agreeing with drinkypoo! Perhaps if just one of the law-abiding citizens involved had been armed, much of this would have been avoided...

        It sounds counter-intuitive to many, but here's a study which supports your position:

        Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement [ssrn.com]

        JOHN R. LOTT Jr.
        State University of New York - Department of Economics
        WILLIAM M. LANDES
        University of Chicago Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

        Few events obtain the same instant worldwide news coverage as multiple victim public shootings. These crimes allow us to study the alternative methods used to kill a large number of people (e.g., shootings versus bombings), marginal deterrence and the severity of the crime, substitutability of penalties, private versus public methods of deterrence and incapacitation, and whether attacks produce copycats. Yet, economists have not studied this phenomenon. Our results are surprising and dramatic. While arrest or conviction rates and the death penalty reduce normal murder rates, our results find that the only policy factor to influence multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws. We explain why public shootings are more sensitive than other violent crimes to concealed handguns, why the laws reduce both the number of shootings as well as their severity, and why other penalties like executions have differential deterrent effects depending upon the type of murder.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Limbaugh Talking points (Score:5, Insightful)

        by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Monday April 16 2007, @03:56PM (#18755983) Homepage Journal

        Drinkypoo, I guess you got the Right Wing Talking points memo from instanpundit

        Look at the fucking timestamps. When I started my comment there were 0 comments in this story.

        I have my own mind and can make it up on my own. Welcome to my foes list.

        The Libertarians' website thingy tells me that I am an upper left centrist. Make of that what you will.

        Accusing people who don't agree with you of following someone else's agenda is a sorry excuse for an actual debate. Mudslinging is easy, but it still makes you look like an ass.

        before he even had any of the links to the facts.

        Fact: Some guy shot a bunch of people.

        Fact: You are not permitted to carry guns on campus.

        Fact: Someone with a gun would have been in a better position to shoot the shooter than someone without a gun. In fact, once the event was confirmed, they called some men with guns and those men came and shot the man shooting people.

        Fact: You are making stupid assumptions. One of them is that he had no facts before you did.

        Good for you. Will you be on Rush Limbaugh tonight?

        Ah yes, compare me to Rush in order to discredit me. That will work fine on the idiot sheeple who respond predictably to such stimulus. But it will not work on rational individuals who are not afraid to make up their own minds.

        Also, if Rush takes the same stance on carrying firearms, then I am not afraid to stand up and be counted as someone who agrees with him on the individual point, because issues and people are different things. Congratulations on being a sheep who does not understand this, and who even attempts to use that confusion to paint me as intolerant.

        Never mind that denying someone their constitutional rights is what's genuinely intolerant here.

        [ Parent ]
    • Re:Thoughts go the the families.. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 16 2007, @03:45PM (#18755695)
      > Thoughts go the the families.

      And to karma-whores, for the sort of pointless statement you get on local TV coverage of this sort of thing.
      [ Parent ]