VA shootings: 2nd amendment's fault or not?

Question

The Virginia Tech shootings were terrible. Could banning, or maybe limiting the 2nd amendment help?

Answer 1

Of course, it would help.

But right-wingers hate America. No other civilized country has the problems that America has because guns are banned

Answer 2

Yep that's what we need to do.

"Locate and confiscate all privately owned firearms." A Hitler.

I'm sorry but you can't have it both ways. If the 2nd Amendment falls so will all the others. If you expect the government to protect you, you are deluded. The forefathers put that in the Constitution to insure the people always had a means to resist their government. That is why the amendment exists. It has nothing to do with hunting or any other nonsense the gun grabbers would like for you to believe. It is the second amendment because they considered it more important than all rights save those of the first amendment.

Ben Franklin said if you are willing to surrender your rights for a promise of security you may not deserve either.

Thomas Jefferson said an armed man is a citizen; an unarmed man is a subject. I added a third comment to that, a disarmed man is a prisoner.

We have 100,000 plus gun laws on the books. In many places it is impossible to purchase a firearm and obey all the laws because they conflict. More laws won't help this or any other issue. In 1950 California had a murder rate half that of the national average. After 55 years of gun control that average is now twice that of the nation. What would it be without the nonsensical laws that cripple the honest person and have no effect on the criminal because by definition the criminal ignores the law? We have "Hate Crimes" added to already illegal actions. What is that all about? If I am white and I kill a white is that better because I don't hate him? Of course not. Most legislation along these lines is law makers trying to convince you they are actually doing something aside from padding their retirement accounts.

If you really think about it, the guy in Virginia was nuts. Now just how do you think you could protect yourself from someone willing to die in order to kill you? The other side of the coin might go something like this: If the man's second victim had been armed and killed this nut case there would have been 31 less body bags that day.

So I ask you, do you really think surrendering your rights will make you safer? And before you answer I would like to remind you that criminals don’t obey the law and neither to crazy people.

Answer 3

Just an FYI, this question has been asked to death.

The answer is no. The 2nd Amendment has already been limited. Lets just say through some crazy twist of fate the country got behind banning the 2nd Amendment(won't ever happen but lets suspend disbelief for a moment). Now how do you put the genie back in the bottle. Its already a given that the millions that posses illegal guns already are not likely to march down to the police station to turn them in now that all guns are illegal, don't you think? And what about the millions of gun owners that are going to become criminals because they refuse to turn in their guns that they had a legal right to own and protect themselves with for over 200 years? So now the only people that truly have guns are only the criminals, and there is never enough police to be everywhere at once to protect us all. Police work is mostly an exercise in catching a lawbreaker after the fact anyway.

So what do you think. Do you think a ban on guns is the answer to prevent tragedies like VA Tech? Don't you think that if somehow we are able to take all the guns out of peoples hands that then maybe explosives(which you can make in your own kitchen with fairly easy to obtain ingredients) may become the weapon of choice for mentally ill, disaffected loner types?

Oh, and FYI, I have the equipment and skills to make my own guns. If I really wanted to I wouldn't ever need to buy one. What do you do then?

Answer 4

Absolutely not, but recognizing the Second Amendment as sacrosanct might, though. The Commonwealth of Virginia had no business placing a restriction on the right of the students to keep and bear arms. Perhaps if one of the students in that lecture hall had been armed, the toll of Cho's attack could have been substantially lower.

Answer 5

Trying to ban or limit the 2nd Amendment in this country will likely result in many more than 33 dying.

We need better mental health in this nation. If you want to blame someone else, blame the draconian methods of insurance companies.

Answer 6

Actually, violating the Second Amendment is what made the shootings possible!

If students were allowed to carry guns, the shooter would have been stopped a lot sooner.

This is EXACTLY why gun-free zones are a bad idea! Criminals love unarmed victims!

Answer 7

No. We have so many laws regarding guns already, just need to enforce them.

Creating more laws only serves to create more outlaws.

"The declaration of rights is, like all other human blessings, alloyed with some inconveniences and not accomplishing fully its object. But the good in this instance vastly outweighs the evil." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789

Answer 8

No. The only thing that should be banned should be the 'antidepressants' that were apparantly used both at VT AND Columbine. That's one helluva side effect!

But I DO think that a 'well regulated militia' should include a 'shooter's license', similar to a driver's license, that can be revoked if you are a criminal or just plain nuts.

A properly armed citizenry just MIGHT be the answer to terrorism, too!

Answer 9

No, the guy was crazy. We should be talking about how colleges need to change their laws in order to prevent this from happening again. Their laws for dealing with mentally ill students is inept. Guns are not to blame but the burecracy of colleges and the court is to blame.

Answer 10

NOPE!!!
Cho was the problem, not the guns....People Kill People..We have over 3000 gun laws on the books, do you think one more will stop Sickos like Cho??
Better to arm the populace, so they can protect themselves, rather than sitting like wounded lambs, waiting for the slaughter.
It's time for America to embrace the 2nd Ammendment, arm and protect yourself, from the sick minds that threaten us

Answer 11

Nope, it was one crazy dude. If you want to ban something for killing people how bout banning cars or doctors? They kill people by the thousands every year but I don't hear people screaming about them.