|
|
Post by Sailor on Apr 16, 2007 13:43:24 GMT -8
>Yes, and 32+ families and their friends can be thankful to our Bill of Rights today as they anticipate burying Virginia Tech students in the days to come. I think VA Tech was a so-called "gun free zone" which virtually guaranteed the only armed person would be the criminal. No student or staff would be armed except perhaps the campus cops, maybe. This guy knew what he was doing, knew his time window would be fairly wide and that his chances of being challenged early by anyone carrying a firearm was very slim. And note that I said only the criminal was armed, no law abiding person was because they were following the law. Had there been a legally owned firearm in the hands of someone able to use it perhaps the butcher's bill wouldn't be so high even had a shootout occured in a school room. This guy was killing everyone he could see anyway, those people were totally helpless and the killer had no mercy. JBark, your statement is dishonest. The Second Amendment is abridged there ensuring that because legally owned firearms are outlawed, only the outlaw had guns. 33 dead because no one there could defend himself or others. You can spin it any way you like but that is the underlying truth of the matter. boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?messageID=800314228� |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Apr 16, 2007 14:49:32 GMT -8
We have a comparrison only a few months old.
Remember the Bosnian kid in Utah who tried something similar to this in at the mall? He was stopped short because a off- duty police officer who was still carring a weapon cournered the shooter and killed him.
Why do libs have such a short, or selective memory?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Apr 16, 2007 17:33:12 GMT -8
We have a comparrison only a few months old. Remember the Bosnian kid in Utah who tried something similar to this in at the mall? He was stopped short because a off- duty police officer who was still carring a weapon cournered the shooter and killed him. Why do libs have such a short, or selective memory? Yep, I remember that one. I also remember that he was a Muslim who may have had a chip on his shoulder, maybe a grudge (real or imagined) against Americans. That's why I want to learn as much about this shooter as possible: name, background, motivation and, dare I say it, religion. As of this writing I don't think police have been able to identify this guy. He was carrying no ID and he reportedly shot himself in the face. That means fingerprints, DNA and maybe dental records IF his upper or lower jaw remained intact. All of this assumes he will be reported as a missing person to police by his family or for some reason has his fingerprints on file with police, state police or federal authorities. One other ID possibility could come from security cameras, assuming he was caught by one. If he was a student, present or former he might be identified in this way. |
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on Apr 16, 2007 18:44:29 GMT -8
Several sites are reporting he's a Chinese immigrant here on a student visa.
There's no way in hell he owns those guns legally.
JBark is an idiot.
His JBark is worse than his JBite, but not as bad as his JBreath.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merceditas on Apr 17, 2007 13:35:01 GMT -8
The media makes so many errors in their effort to put something out there, regardless of it's accuracy.
This is what I gather, so far "Cho — who arrived in the United States as boy from
South Korea in 1992 and was raised in suburban Washington, D.C., where his parents worked at a dry cleaners "
"Cho held a green card, meaning he was a legal, permanent resident. That meant he was eligible to buy a handgun unless he had been convicted of a felony." (from yahoo news)
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Apr 17, 2007 18:37:46 GMT -8
The media makes so many errors in their effort to put something out there, regardless of it's accuracy. This is what I gather, so far "Cho — who arrived in the United States as boy from South Korea in 1992 and was raised in suburban Washington, D.C., where his parents worked at a dry cleaners " "Cho held a green card, meaning he was a legal, permanent resident. That meant he was eligible to buy a handgun unless he had been convicted of a felony." (from yahoo news) That's what I got also. DenaliWolf put up an article that said this guy wrote a letter signing it "Ismail Ax," which he suggests a possible Jihadi motivation. I want more evidence before I'd go that far and suggest this is a Jihadi type attack. If this guy had been Muslim or from an Islamic nation I'd call it a slam dunk. This guy was from South Korea. |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Apr 18, 2007 17:25:28 GMT -8
We have a comparrison only a few months old. Remember the Bosnian kid in Utah who tried something similar to this in at the mall? He was stopped short because a off- duty police officer who was still carring a weapon cournered the shooter and killed him. Why do libs have such a short, or selective memory? Yep, I remember that one. I also remember that he was a Muslim who may have had a chip on his shoulder, maybe a grudge (real or imagined) against Americans. That's why I want to learn as much about this shooter as possible: name, background, motivation and, dare I say it, religion. As of this writing I don't think police have been able to identify this guy. He was carrying no ID and he reportedly shot himself in the face. That means fingerprints, DNA and maybe dental records IF his upper or lower jaw remained intact. All of this assumes he will be reported as a missing person to police by his family or for some reason has his fingerprints on file with police, state police or federal authorities. One other ID possibility could come from security cameras, assuming he was caught by one. If he was a student, present or former he might be identified in this way. Amazing, I must have posted that article on the Utah shooter about 5 times and directly towards the loudest leftists. So far that I've seen they've all opted no to respond and to continue as if it was never even brought up. This has to be a clear example of willful ignorance. |
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Apr 18, 2007 17:57:24 GMT -8
Willful ignorance is what many of them do best. I never expect anything else from them anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by MrDoublel on Apr 20, 2007 7:30:38 GMT -8
They are, without a doubt, willfully ignorant. You see, the article you posted runs counter to their version of the world. If you throw out facts that portray the world as it is instead as they perceive it they ignore the facts and attempt to divert the conversation with a few well placed strawmen.
|
|
