Virginia Tech 32-Lie in to Protest Easy Gun Laws

The quickest path

to Democratic electoral losses?
Calls for gun control.
If the NICS had been properly implemented, Cho would not have been able to get those guns.
And to use memory of a tragedy to push a political agenda is not something I would do.
Bush did it after 9/11, you know. Think Patriot Act.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 02:54:12 AM CDT

It's not so simple

If Cho were alive today, he wouldn't have been able to buy guns the way he did, but it would have been very easy for him to purchase guns at a gun show the way that Omar did in the article I linked. The friends and families--and some of the victims themselves--who are participating in this feel that it is the best way to move on from what happened and will save lives.
Additionally, we are being very careful not to schedule this at a time when it would disrupt any of the events on the 16th.

---

by: Aimee Fausser @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 06:46:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Again

you make gun control a campaign issue for a Dem, and that person WILL lose the election.
Or for a Republican, for that matter.
Ask Chap Petersen what helped him beat JMDD.
People do not want gun control.
The Republicans controlled the Congress for ten years, the White House for eight, and managed to stick two hard right conservatives on the Supreme Court...yet Roe vs. Wade stuill stands.
Why?
Because people want it there.
Calls for gun control are a huge part of what cost uus the Congress in '96.
Why?
People don't want it.
They didn't want it then, and they don't want it now.
All you do with protests like this is energize the right and give them talking points to use against us.
That's all.
And another problem: a Virginia CHP is void on the Tech Campus.
No good there.
If one law-abiding, lawfully permitted individual had met Cho along the path of his killing spree?
We might have been looking at three dead instead of thirty-three.
Here, you fall into the typical knee-jerk reaction of blaming the implements for the implementers' actions.
What if Cho had driven a car through a crowded parking lot and killed 33 people?
Would you now be calling for car control?
Think about it.

---

by: kestrel9000 @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 12:09:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Your comments show how misinformed you are

As documented in the links I provide, even trained individuals would not have been able to have stopped this tragedy from happening.
Closing the gun show loophole will save lives, and further legitimize gun owners who are lawfully eligible to purchase guns. All I am arguing for is that you would have to show ID and get a background check. This isn't further gun control, it's making sure the current laws don't have loopholes.

---

by: Aimee Fausser @ Tue Apr 14, 2009 at 08:31:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The root cause

I thought the root cause of the Virginia Tech Massacre was the mental health of the perpetrator.  His purchasing of the instruments to commit the crime was secondary.  Seems to me if you don't focus on the root cause, you can make it as difficult as you like to buy guns and still not solve the problem.

---

by: tx2vadem @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 08:19:04 AM CDT

Mental health is another critical issue to address

But closing this loophole is something simple that can be done to save lives. That is not to say that those supporting this cause do not also support mental health reform--many of the group have been active advocates at the state and national level for reform.

---

by: Aimee Fausser @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 08:50:40 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A New Rasmussen Poll

should give you a boost.  According to their poll:

Seventy-six percent (76%) say Virginia should require all sellers at gun shows to do background checks on buyers. Just 17 percent disagree.

The main part of the poll is not as sunny on the gubernatorial race as those PPP polls.  You can see their full poll here.

---

by: tx2vadem @ Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 21:42:04 PM CDT