Does this make any sense to any one?

Question

I just read the AP article that said police at VT spent 3 minutes charging the building and 5 more minutes breaking in as Cho had chained the doors. I don't know how many doors were in that building but I will assume it took him 5 minutes to chain all the doors. That means a gun man who had already killed was allowed to run amouk for at least 13 minutes with NO OPPOSITION.

The AP article also states he fired 170 rounds. 170 rounds at 13 minutes duration turns out to be 1 round every 5 seconds which means he was selecting his targets deliberately and carefully UNOPPOSED.

How can even the most liberal Dem/Lib possibly say students/professors/janitors should not have been armed. If just one person in that building had been armed this matter could have been stopped or at least cornered early own. Shame on Dems/Libs for their callowless attitude.

OBTW please don't tell me armed citizens is not the answer for in this situation it very clearly WAS THE ANSWER.

Joshua K long wordy reply but you are skirting the issue. If just ONE person had been armed this would have ended much differently. BE HONEST now.

When citizens are disarmed criminals can do what they want to when they want to.

And why did he attack a class room building rather than SEcurity or the police station. Even a Dem/Lib has to be intellectually honest enough to figure that question out.

Answer 1

My question is how was a person who was not even a US citizen get a gun?

Answer 2

I'm a little bit skeptical of the claim that he chained the doors.

It's possible that the doors were already chained, or at least just locked where there was only one that could be opened from the outside.

Perhaps someone doesn't want to answer the question of whether that was a good idea or not, and found it plausible to blame the shooter.

Answer 3

Already, by your OBTW disclaimer, you will not be predisposed to take my answer seriously, but you asked, so I will attempt to answer.
First... you can not have police just run up to the building, they have to move carefully, and deliberately, so as to not A)become targets (they are there to help, not die), and B) to not aggravate the gunman further. This takes time... and precious seconds become precious minutes... but it could be the difference between 30 being killed, and 50.
Second... when a door is chained from the inside tightly... how exactly do you open it in less than 5 minutes. C4? Nope... too big of a bang... this would notify the aggressor, and let him know where the opposition is coming from. Jaws of Life? Nope... that takes almost 20 minutes to get a firetruck in safely, set up, and then tear through the door. Bolt cutters? Most likely... but first you have to FIND a door that is chained loosely enough to allow the chain to be reached from the outside. Many of those windows are hardened, or wire-laced, so you cant just smash through one to get at the chain. 5 minutes may seem like a long time... but not compared to how long it would have taken UNTRAINED enforcement officers, or God forbid, civilians like you and me.

Third... 170 rounds in thirteen minutes, when coming from a weapon with semiautomatic fire settings is NOTHING. The M16 A2, standard combat rifle of the Army can fire, with mediocre accuracy, 70+ rounds a minute... including reloading. This kid did not reload, he just changed weapons. I am sure he had certain targets, but there are plenty of reports of him just firing wildly at moving targets. I have a feeling that his "barrage of bullets" actually came in short bursts, probably 30 to 40 at a time, in calculated strikes. Keep in mind, this kid was crazy, but he was A)motivated, B) zealot-like, C) VERY angry, and D) willing to die. He had all the time in the world to decide where and when he wanted to fire. Yes... he probably fired deliberately at times, but he was still going for as much damage as he could perform. Even by your timeline of 13 minutes, the authorities were doing EVERYTHING in their power to save lives.

Keep in mind, at this point... they dont know how many shooters there are, what the shooters look like, how well the are armed, what their intent is, or where they are at any moment. Like I said earlier, 13 minutes is not much time. If the police had just gone RAMBO, taken a tank, rammed the doors, and started firing indiscriminately, there would have been incalculable deaths, innocents and the guilty.

Yes, this whole incident could have been avoided if we had a team of psychics standing bye that day. They could have notified the school's Samurai Ninja Squad (SNS) to intercept Cho before he would have made it to the first dorm room. However... the school did not have psychics, and the SNS was on vacation in Hawaii that week. My point to this little bit of sarcasm is this... What happened could not have been reasonably avoided. Yes, the kid was a nut, and yes, he was locked up for a bit for his own good... but this was NOT a foreseeable event.

As for guns in the schools... I dont know how old you are... but have you seen the 20 year olds? They are hormonal balls of intense energy... do you want them all to be able to carry guns? Good idea... instead of 33 deaths in one day, we would have roughly 45 a month. (Note, I am a card carrying member of the NRA) If the professors were to carry guns... who is to say they would have had the gumption to charge headfirst into a hallway under fire? Bravery and courage are well and good when you read about them in history books and see them on the news, but when it is really happening to YOU... sometimes it is hard to find. And DON'T you dare say that you would be willing to dive headfirst into a fire fight.... I have been in one, when I served in the Army... and it is one of the scariest things to EVER be in.

So, using your logic, and expanding on it, if even just 20 people had had a gun for self-defense in that building, you have to follow statistical analysis. We can assume that 4 to 5 would not even have their guns loaded. They have a gun to look cool... not to actually use it. We can assume then, that 15 have a loaded weapon. 5 floors in this building mean an average of 3 armed citizens (to use your word) per floor. Now... at a distance of more than 30 feet, how many would have even been able to hit their target, with their mind warped with fear, and adrenaline pumping through their veins. Generally speaking, when you are breathing hard, you are lucky to hit your target 1 time out of ten. Moving on... lets assume that of those three citizens who are armed, ONE has the bravery to dive out into the hall, dodge bullets in the MATRIX fashion, and pursue Cho... as s/he is coming around the corner, three scared students run out in front of him/her. Being fully armed, locked and loaded, and ready to kill to save lives (irony), this citizen is startled, and opens fire at the three students. presuming they are running in a group, this enlarges the target, and one of them is now shot. 5 floors... this is now 5 are shot in similar fashion.

By this time, the police are working on entering the building. they have opened a door, and are now proceeding to find the agressor/S. They have a shoot order, to protect students lives, and on each floor, until they find Cho, they have killed armed students who are roaming the hall attempting to find Cho themselves. We have just exasperated the problem HORRIBLY. Now more innocents are dead.

Do I have an answer to how this could have been prevented... no... IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN PREVENTED! It is a shame, a horror, and an absolute atrocity that this happened... but what can make it even worse is when people claim that they would have done better... when they were not even there. Hindsight is 20/20. Of course you can SAY you know what you would do... but since you were not there, and I was not there... our opinions are USELESS. Everyone wants to point the finger of blame, to make sense of 22 senseless deaths. Sorry... it isnt that easy. It could be that NO ONE was to blame, but for Cho.

(I dont expect you liked my answer that much), but thank you for reading.)

****EDIT*****

Obviously you did not read my message... it does not matter if even 100 people had guns... the likelihood that it would have been used EFFECTIVELY is slim to none. The guns would not have made one ounce of difference. There are no magical bullets that would have taken this guy down. You are looking at the past and saying how things would have been different if you could have done it your way, KNOWING everything you know now. since you can not, your point is moot.

Answer 4

I don't need to be wordy, my reply to you is this:

YES, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.