Did Liberalism Cause Virginia Tech Shootings?

[red states rule]

Principals aside. Some facts change in 13 years.

Is it because everything more recent doesnt fit your agenda?

or havent you found anything to back you up on your right wing websites?

If you wait long enough you will find it.

Im sure right now, right this very second someone is compiling statistical evidence to be applied to the right wing agenda. yaaaaaayyy

and surprise! there will also be stastics and evidence for the left. booo.

So MORE guns cause MORE crime?

25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As usual, the libs were wrong with their doom and gloom perdictions on what would happen if law abiding people are allowed to carry concealed weapons


25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'
Crime rate plummeted after law required firearms for residents

As the nation debates whether more guns or fewer can prevent tragedies like the Virginia Tech Massacre, a notable anniversary passed last month in a Georgia town that witnessed a dramatic plunge in crime and violence after mandating residents to own firearms.

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of "Wild West" showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

By comparison, the population of Morton Grove, the first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban for anyone other than police officers, has actually dropped slightly and stands at 22,202, according to 2005 statistics. More significantly, perhaps, the city's crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent. Today, by comparison, the township's crime rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000.

This was not what some predicted.

In a column titled "Gun Town USA," Art Buchwald suggested Kennesaw would soon become a place where routine disagreements between neighbors would be settled in shootouts. The Washington Post mocked Kennesaw as "the brave little city … soon to be pistol-packing capital of the world." Phil Donahue invited the mayor on his show.

Reuters, the European news service, today revisited the Kennesaw controversy following the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Police Lt. Craig Graydon said: "When the Kennesaw law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime … and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then. We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area." Kennesaw is just north of Atlanta.

The Reuters story went on to report: "Since the Virginia Tech shootings, some conservative U.S. talk show hosts have rejected attempts to link the massacre to the availability of guns, arguing that had students been allowed to carry weapons on campus someone might have been able to shoot the killer."

Virginia Tech, like many of the nation's schools and college campuses, is a so-called "gun-free zone," which Second Amendment supporters say invites gun violence – especially from disturbed individuals seeking to kill as many victims as possible.

Cho Seung-Hui murdered 32 and wounded another 15 before turning his gun on himself.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=55288

 

[red states rule]

So if you KNOW that, then why aren't they anti-gunners or some such label instead of trying to sell it as "libs?" It just makes YOU look ignorant.

I imagine there are more than one or two sepcial interest gorups tied to the democrat party that are despised by your average liberal the same as there are special interest groups tied to the Republican party that IMO do nothing but drag the party down.

For the same reason you seldom hear any group called liberal - yet you always hear how this group is a conservative group

If not for double standards, the liberal media would not have any standards all

 

[red states rule]

So if you KNOW that, then why aren't they anti-gunners or some such label instead of trying to sell it as "libs?" It just makes YOU look ignorant.

I imagine there are more than one or two sepcial interest gorups tied to the democrat party that are despised by your average liberal the same as there are special interest groups tied to the Republican party that IMO do nothing but drag the party down.

MSNBC.com Cites Unlabeled Anti-Gun Activist
Posted by Matthew Sheffield on April 23, 2007 - 22:55.
If you run a policy group in Washington, your chances of getting on network television are slim if you happen to advocate for a cause not favored by liberals. Your chances are even worse that anything you say won't be slapped with a "conservative" label to warn viewers of your perspective.

That's a good thing. Most groups can be placed somewhere on the political spectrum and that placement should be disclosed to the news consumer. The unfortunate thing, however, is that if you're a liberal group, your affinities often are not disclosed.

Such was the case with this MSNBC.com article on the subject of guns which features a quote from one Joseph Vince who happens to be a gun control advocate. This information is not disclosed to the audience. Instead, we get this:

In the photos Cho sent to NBC, he showed some of his ammunition — hollow-point rounds, purchased, officials say, in the weeks before the shootings. Law enforcement officials say hollow-points are generally considered more lethal.

Joseph Vince, a retired ATF agent, agrees.
"It's not something that you would need for home protection, because what you are trying to do is eliminate an immediate threat," Vince says. "The idea of killing is what this ammunition portrays to me."

However, as St Wendeler at Another Rovian Conspiracy points out, Vince is not just your run-of-the-mill former ATF official:

MSNBC features analysis from a "retired ATF agent" who also happens to be: 1) Member of an organization that is apparently gun control front; 2) in the employ of Handgun Control Inc, the premier handgun control lobbying group in the country; and 3) supports legal actions against firearm dealers.

And they fail to mention this affiliation at all in their story. Surely they knew Mr. Vince's bio when they sought him out for comment.

It's almost as if MSNBC has some sort of agenda to push or something and doesn't want it audience to be informed.

Side note: Vince's remark is incredibly stupid on its own. He apparently thinks that metal bullets should not be about "the idea of killing." Ridiculous.

Hat tip: Instapundit.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12258

 

[Gunny]

So MORE guns cause MORE crime?

25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As usual, the libs were wrong with their doom and gloom perdictions on what would happen if law abiding people are allowed to carry concealed weapons


25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'
Crime rate plummeted after law required firearms for residents

As the nation debates whether more guns or fewer can prevent tragedies like the Virginia Tech Massacre, a notable anniversary passed last month in a Georgia town that witnessed a dramatic plunge in crime and violence after mandating residents to own firearms.

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of "Wild West" showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

By comparison, the population of Morton Grove, the first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban for anyone other than police officers, has actually dropped slightly and stands at 22,202, according to 2005 statistics. More significantly, perhaps, the city's crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent. Today, by comparison, the township's crime rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000.

This was not what some predicted.

In a column titled "Gun Town USA," Art Buchwald suggested Kennesaw would soon become a place where routine disagreements between neighbors would be settled in shootouts. The Washington Post mocked Kennesaw as "the brave little city … soon to be pistol-packing capital of the world." Phil Donahue invited the mayor on his show.

Reuters, the European news service, today revisited the Kennesaw controversy following the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Police Lt. Craig Graydon said: "When the Kennesaw law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime … and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then. We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area." Kennesaw is just north of Atlanta.

The Reuters story went on to report: "Since the Virginia Tech shootings, some conservative U.S. talk show hosts have rejected attempts to link the massacre to the availability of guns, arguing that had students been allowed to carry weapons on campus someone might have been able to shoot the killer."

Virginia Tech, like many of the nation's schools and college campuses, is a so-called "gun-free zone," which Second Amendment supporters say invites gun violence – especially from disturbed individuals seeking to kill as many victims as possible.

Cho Seung-Hui murdered 32 and wounded another 15 before turning his gun on himself.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=55288

I need to point something out to you that is going to save me a LOT of future work.

It is not legal to post stories in their entirety. Most news-style stories summarize in the first paragraph and expound in the paragraphs that follow. The reader is either attracted by the first paragraph or not.

The proper way to post a copyrighted story on a message board is to post the first one or two paragraphs, followed by the link. This not only keeps the board and board owner out of legal trouble, it saves bandwidth.

I'd appreciate it if you could use this format in the future when reprinting copyrighted articles.

 

[Gunny]

For the same reason you seldom hear any group called liberal - yet you always hear how this group is a conservative group

If not for double standards, the liberal media would not have any standards all

So compounding what you perceive as a wrong with an identical wrong is okay?

 

[red states rule]

So compounding what you perceive as a wrong with an identical wrong is okay?

Call it one or the other for both sides

Of course that will never happen in the liberal media

 

[Gunny]

MSNBC.com Cites Unlabeled Anti-Gun Activist
Posted by Matthew Sheffield on April 23, 2007 - 22:55.
If you run a policy group in Washington, your chances of getting on network television are slim if you happen to advocate for a cause not favored by liberals. Your chances are even worse that anything you say won't be slapped with a "conservative" label to warn viewers of your perspective.

That's a good thing. Most groups can be placed somewhere on the political spectrum and that placement should be disclosed to the news consumer. The unfortunate thing, however, is that if you're a liberal group, your affinities often are not disclosed.

Such was the case with this MSNBC.com article on the subject of guns which features a quote from one Joseph Vince who happens to be a gun control advocate. This information is not disclosed to the audience. Instead, we get this:

In the photos Cho sent to NBC, he showed some of his ammunition — hollow-point rounds, purchased, officials say, in the weeks before the shootings. Law enforcement officials say hollow-points are generally considered more lethal.

Joseph Vince, a retired ATF agent, agrees.
"It's not something that you would need for home protection, because what you are trying to do is eliminate an immediate threat," Vince says. "The idea of killing is what this ammunition portrays to me."

However, as St Wendeler at Another Rovian Conspiracy points out, Vince is not just your run-of-the-mill former ATF official:

MSNBC features analysis from a "retired ATF agent" who also happens to be: 1) Member of an organization that is apparently gun control front; 2) in the employ of Handgun Control Inc, the premier handgun control lobbying group in the country; and 3) supports legal actions against firearm dealers.

And they fail to mention this affiliation at all in their story. Surely they knew Mr. Vince's bio when they sought him out for comment.

It's almost as if MSNBC has some sort of agenda to push or something and doesn't want it audience to be informed.

Side note: Vince's remark is incredibly stupid on its own. He apparently thinks that metal bullets should not be about "the idea of killing." Ridiculous.

Hat tip: Instapundit.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12258

What's this supposed to be? I don't respond to linked articles as responses to me. Speak for yourself.

 

[red states rule]

What's this supposed to be? I don't respond to linked articles as responses to me. Speak for yourself.

Oh another MM - don't post articles with facts

 

[Gunny]

Oh another MM - don't post articles with facts

Posting links to support your argument is one thing. Posting articles in lieu of a response quite another. If engaged in a real debate, you can't just throw newspapers and books on the podium as responses.

You have to actually articulate them.

 

[red states rule]

Posting links to support your argument is one thing. Posting articles in lieu of a response quite another. If engaged in a real debate, you can't just throw newspapers and books on the podium as responses.

You have to actually articulate them.

I do. It seems some have an phobia with me doing exactly that

 

[Diuretic]

Well...yeah, I call guys/girls "babe" if I'm fond of them...it isn't gender specific, you know!! (hahaha)

Personally, I think students being allowed to carry weapons on campus is so not a good idea. I remember my college days...too much stress, too little time, guy problems (you know you blokes DO drive us crazy at that age)...I don't at all mean to make light of the sitch at vt, but I could see all kinds of students going balistic and taking out half the student and faculty population! Hell, I've already witnessed it in Chapel Hill with the crazy guy (I'm damn sure his name was Wendell something or the other...or maybe his last name was Wendell)...oh, and year before last when the equally crazy dude ran his SUV into the quad at Chapel Hill and tried to take out as many peeps as possible!! Spikes thought that was the most hilarious thing he had seen in a while...one of the most liberal, "tolerant and diverse" universities in the country was attacked by a "would be" terrorist...have to admit, I did see the humour in that one...but, I digress...no, students (no matter how "old" and mature we think we are at 18-22 years of age) definitely don't need guns. Not sure what the answer is...may not be one, at all...and I am pro 2nd amendment rights...just, not so much on college campuses. Hell, I can think back on a person or two I may have been tempted to off if we could have legally carried guns in college. Okay, not really, but the thought would have definitely crossed my mind...

Oh, also...Diuretic...I think it was you that I did the cuckoo emoticon to...sorry, I'm practically legally blind and didn't see that was what he was all about...truly sorry!!...I'm getting glasses here in a couple of weeks!!

No worries myth - I don't get offended easily

 

[Diuretic]

There have been many cases where private citizens have STOPPED shooters from killing more people by shooting/or holding the suspect until the Police arrived

There is nothing wrong with law abiding citizens carrying a gun and protecting themselvs and others

If up to libs, the only weapon people woudl ahve against criminals is harsh language

I don't have a problem with CCW permit holders. The ones I've met in the States have been fine. It's not my place to debate the details of CCW because that's up to the citizens of the state but I do not have a problem with CCW. I used to own a Colt Diamondback (nice revolver) and a Remington pump action shotgun. I have shot many different weapons over the years. Guns don't scare me, they're just a tool.

Those CCW citizens who've protected their fellow citizens deserve a medal and free ammo for life. But that wasn't my point.

 

[Diuretic]

No disagreements with you on those points

I cannot understand why anyone would think "A Gun Free Zone" would prevent what happened at VT, and how they can say one teacher or stundent with a gun would not have made a difference

You must have missed my post.

 

[red states rule]

I don't have a problem with CCW permit holders. The ones I've met in the States have been fine. It's not my place to debate the details of CCW because that's up to the citizens of the state but I do not have a problem with CCW. I used to own a Colt Diamondback (nice revolver) and a Remington pump action shotgun. I have shot many different weapons over the years. Guns don't scare me, they're just a tool.

Those CCW citizens who've protected their fellow citizens deserve a medal and free ammo for life. But that wasn't my point.

Fair enough

If I misunstood your post - I do apologize

Today, people cannot rely on the Police to protect them. They have to take steps to protect themselves

 

[Diuretic]

The principal is still true

If the criminal thinks you may be armed they may not commit the crime

Look at England - the facts speak are there

Libs bellow how England is the model for gun control. It is if you are the criminal

How many criminals have you spoken to about their crimes?

 

[red states rule]

How many criminals have you spoken to about their crimes?

It is called common sense

Do you think criminals will attempt to commit a crime if they suspect the victim is armed?

 

[Diuretic]

Fair enough

If I misunstood your post - I do apologize

Today, people cannot rely on the Police to protect them. They have to take steps to protect themselves

You're right about the police. The police don't exist to protect you or me or anyone else. So it makes sense to me that if someone can invest in their own safety and of course that of their family then the should go ahead and do so. If I lived in the States and CCW was available to me I'd be signing up for it. I don't give a shit whether people think I should or shouldn't feel frightened. I've felt a bit apprehensive in the US, in the UK, in France, apprehensive many times in my own country and funny, the times when I was carrying a handgun (or a long weapon) at least I felt on an equal footing. Would I use it? You bet I would.

 

[red states rule]

You're right about the police. The police don't exist to protect you or me or anyone else. So it makes sense to me that if someone can invest in their own safety and of course that of their family then the should go ahead and do so. If I lived in the States and CCW was available to me I'd be signing up for it. I don't give a shit whether people think I should or shouldn't feel frightened. I've felt a bit apprehensive in the US, in the UK, in France, apprehensive many times in my own country and funny, the times when I was carrying a handgun (or a long weapon) at least I felt on an equal footing. Would I use it? You bet I would.

The UK has very strict gun laws (I believe they prohibit private citizens from owning them) and the crime rate has gone through the roof

 

[Diuretic]

It is called common sense

Do you think criminals will attempt to commit a crime if they suspect the victim is armed?

Criminals (generally) don't even think about it (depending on the crime of course). I would wager that if you asked the average liquor store robber in a state in the US that he (usually it's a bloke I think) wouldn't have a clue if it was a CCW state or not.

I'm looking at CCW from the point of view of the person who choose to avail themselves of their lawful right to arm themselves. I don't think for one minute it's a general or a specific deterrent, I do know that equalling up is a good idea though.

 

[Diuretic]

The UK has very strict gun laws (I believe they prohibit private citizens from owning them) and the crime rate has gone through the roof

They do have strict gun laws. So what? Are you arguing a causal correlation between strict gun laws and crime rates? If you are here's a couple of points.

1. The Brits have, as far back as I can remember, had very strict firearms laws.
2. The crime rate in the UK has been steadily rising over many years.

Now think about it.