VA Tech Massacre

[F15pilotX 4]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266374,00.html

 

:? The second columbine, only worse...apparantly a guy went from classroom to classroom, shooting people until he found his girlfriend

 

Senseless murder

[TheBlackOut 7]

I heard two shooters... :S

[mormreed 0]

heard that on the news... the guy had some real anger management problems if he really was just looking for his girlfriend

[sith_wampa 6]

Wtf? He chained the doors shut?

[F15pilotX 4]

he first shot his gf and another guy in a dorm, then killed 30 more later

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Another story of someone going ape****. Sad and all but nothing new or out of the ordinary.

[Luk3us 63]

Damn another one... Truly awful...

[TheBlackOut 7]

Another story of someone going ape****. Sad and all but nothing new or out of the ordinary.

 

That many? And just looking for his girlfriend? Yah a little.. All the others were just mad cuz they got teased on... Aww boohoo. This guy was just looking for his girlfriend and thought "Jee wizz, can't find her, guess I'll have to go kill some peeps"

 

Even if it isn't out of the ordinary it's still sick and very sad...

[F15pilotX 4]

actually the biggest killing spree in US history 0_0

 

anyway, he was a 23-year-old Korean named Cho Seung-Hui whose family lives in in Centerville, near D.C.

 

Picture:

 

[TheBlackOut 7]

Fits the look.

[sith_wampa 6]

This is just overwhelmingly stupid and very sad...

[Sonic 296]

So how long until they start blaming video games again?

[Guest Rabbit]

Already did on two separate accounts... Jack Thompson and Dr Phil.

[F15pilotX 4]

and now the far left (rosie odonnel, in particular) is clamoring for laws against regular people having guns, while during katrina, if people hadn't had guns, no one would've been able to defend against those roaming gangs...of course, she has bodyguards with guns :roll:

[sith_wampa 6]

I choose to ignore Rosie and her little gang of stingy propaganda spreading nitwit old ladies. Its far more healthy just to watch the news.

[TheBlackOut 7]

I choose to ignore Rosie and her little gang of stingy propaganda spreading nitwit old ladies. Its far more healthy just to watch the news.

 

Everyone ignores that lesbo anyways. Not even the liberals listen... Only the women that hate Oprah cuz she's black watch Rosie.

 

Video games? Pfff. That asian dude was just screwed up and was totally emotionless.

[sith_wampa 6]

He wasn't emotionless. If he was, he wouldn't have had the guilt to kill himself.

[TheBlackOut 7]

He showed none for the people he was killing. And he probably killed himself because he figured he'd get killed by the police or get ass raped in jail forever...

[F15pilotX 4]

he was taking anti-depressants, so it sounds to me that he just wanted to take other people with him :?

[TheBlackOut 7]

People have a fear of dying... And then add that fear to the fear of dying a lone and a killer is born...

[Sonic 296]

I watched his confession video (I guess it can be called that) on the news tonight, he looked crazy. He had the whole world was against him thing.

[sith_wampa 6]

He referenced the killers at Columbine as Martyrs... :roll:

[General Leang 0]

A friend of mine wrote this about the Virginia Tech shootings, it basically sums up many of my thoughts.

 

The two issues that always arise with shootings such as this, definetly the school shootings such as last week's tragedy as well as Columbine, Paducha, ect is the control of weapons particularly those used in these incidents and whether film and video games have an influence. Now the issue of gun control, on the one hand all the military rifles, all the high powered type of stuff you can get, people don't need this sort of thing. What legal reason can the same rifles and sub machine guns used by people such as SWAT teams, special forces, the people who are trained specifically to kill and to use force to enforce the law, what legal reason can people outside those organisations have for owning or wanting to own such a weapon? On the other hand the ideas surrounding gun control is all wrong. I find it ironic that if someone else had a gun then they could have stopped Seung-Hui Cho before it got anywhere near where it did, but outside of that people look at something like the Port Arthur massecre that occured eleven years ago and they banned automatic rifles, in light of the Virginia Tech shooting they want to ban Glock handguns because that was the weapon used. You don't need a Styer AUG or 18 autofire to commit a shooting, you can achieve the same result with a revolver or a bolt action rifle or a single shot Derringer you have to reload after each shot. Much of the reason for this comes from the panic people have in these situations, in just about every instance like this people have been trained almost too well to be completely scarred and they, rightfully I might add react with panic. The issue lies in how easy it is to obtain guns and this is a war on two or three fronts. One, there is the right to bear arms and it is a right that should stand, the issue lies in whether or not specific weapons should be made avalible. Now this might sound contradictory to the notion that gun control is wrong by banning certain weapons, but the issue with that is the belief that if weapon X was banned then the problem would go away. The larger issue is how avalible guns are. Rather than allow everyone to have guns as has been proposed if guns were a lot harder to access then there wouldn't be the problems we face with guns. Now this leads to the second point in restricted guns finding their way into the hands of criminals. The black market is rife with the types of weapons people simply shouldn't have and is an issue that must be addressed. The third point lies in whether or not certain people should be allowed to have guns. Seung-Hui Cho appeared normal by all accounts but the signs were there. The disturbing writing, setting fire to his dorm, posing like the characters in violent films, which I'll get to in a minute. These type of things are what's known as having form, in that it delves into the type of character these people are. Someone like Seung-Hui Cho could easily commit the crimes given his mental state. The same goes for other mentally ill people, such as how dangerous it would be for someone who is suffering from depression, or maybe show leniancy and push the case to them attempting suicide, to own a gun. In this case, as well as the cases of incidents like Columbine and Paducha the people felt they had to take revenge for the torments they suffered, and very much power grows from the barrel of a gun. Not only would these incidents have been averted if people like the Trenchcoat Mafia hadn't been able to get their hands on guns as I said but a fourth point is to look at the causes of these rampages. Why did Seung-Hui Cho kill all these people before killing himself? Because he thought he was bullied and singled out. Why did Columbine happen? Because the perpetrators blamed others, they set out to right the wrongs they felt they suffered. It's no excuse, less than no excuse in the case of Columbine as going by their videos they wanted to do it because, well, because they could, because they thought it would be great fun to kill as many people as they could. People like that deserve a bullet, but the point I'm making here is that these people in their minds were victimised, and they sought to take matters into their own hands. It's a desire of everyone who's suffered bullying at school, and while killing is never a valid excuse one of the triggers we see from these school shootings is bullying. Cut this cancer out and you will go a long way to stopping the problem.

 

Now for the other issue that always comes up with these incidents, whether film and video games have an influence. I know of at least two serious investigations of this concerning video games. The first involved whether games made you dessensitised to violence and taught you skills nessecary to kill. I would say yes on both counts, the same as something like a driving game can teach you to drive. Games for the most part are pretty basic, with the possible exception of flight simulators. Racing games for example don't usually have how much you push the accelerator and brake, or something like basketball where you can't roll the ball with your fingers so that it has the right direction of spin to help the shot. The concern of how much games may teach arised in the Rainbow Six games, where with the first one it was about giving the full complete impact of elite counterterrorism (planning, one shot kills, proper tactics, ect) but it left out things (far more operatives are used, helicopter support) though you learn a lot in the game or even seeing a real team go through a real kill house. When making Raven Shield the point was raised on whether the games could teach terrorists anything. The defense was that all the things in the games are really common sense and they worked to leave out anything sensitive. The same arguement have been used in books where tactical procedures are altered, but I maintain people can get an idea of how people would act in those situations, an idea of what something might do, ect. The other test was how games affect our behaviour. A group of children played kiddy games and we saw how they played afterwards, it was all very calm, civil, and then adult games, shooting games, and they were much more aggressive. This suggests that violent games can make us violent. It could also from my point of view be from the anticipation of playing these games, that the children are excited about something they usually don't get to do. Now pretty much the same line of thought can be applied to films. I would say that films and video games can be influential, they can give ideas, they can even be educational in a negative way. However I would argue that the problem lies in those who haven't the self control to not commit these acts and those who cannot see what is right and what is wrong.