Another School Shooting (Virginia Tech)

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Really, you're the one bleating about the fact that this guy wasn't whipped away to the funny farm the moment he started sounding a bit nuts...

Really? I guess you haven't wiped away the results or your latest brown shower with your buddy Ahmedinejad, so you can't see. Maybe the part of my post about "arson" "stalking" "harassment" "trespass" etc. Those little details of this concept called "conduct" which goes more than a bit beyond writing puerile crap.

And "bleating?" - you're the one with the thing for goats, not me, so kindly keep your personal life to yourself.

Then again, responding to what anyone actually posted would reduce your trolling opportunities so much, and force you to rely on whatever it is which passes for your brains. You'd be SOL there, so trolling away is all you've got.

That's right, run away when you get your arse whipped as usual - we all know you're scared they might take away your masturbation aid with the laser sight. It's evident by your laughable attempts at macho posturing that you need something with which to feel like a real man...

And what, pray tell, would you know about a "real man?" Greedily taking Abdullah's man meat up your arse doesn't count. )

We all know what they say about men with guns and big cars and what they're lacking between their legs - I bet you're the type of meathead that wishes he had a Humvee...

Of course you would. We all know you're the type who'd "welsh" on your bets.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

CNN also learned Wednesday that in 2005 Cho was declared mentally ill by a Virginia special justice, who declared he was "an imminent danger" to himself, a court document states.

When a court declares you an imminent danger, why shouldn't you be shipped off to a funny farm?

Why didn't the background check at gun purchase deny eligibility on the basis of this declaration? It seems this background check needs to be a lot more robust. I wonder what they think it can accomplish if it doesn't prevent someone found to be "an imminent danger" in court documents from legally purchasing multiple semiautomatic weapons without so much as a flag for follow up?

[Thorn]

MTG I declare a gentlemen's feud with you, if you would oblidge me and march 30 paces, we can settle this disagreement civily.

[Geronimo]

I'm suprised mtg and mobius haven't ended up on one or the others ignore list yet. Do they actually enjoy all this banter?

[Thorn]

You know, i'm suprised no one here has jumped on the obvious tradgedy here, not the gun control, failure of the mental health system, but the practical failure to enact any kind of evacuation plan for the students by the school administration who thought it produent to keep the shooting in the dorm a secret up until 9:00am even though they knew a hour earlier, finally at 9am they decided to mass email students about it, which didn't save people who were already headed or in classes.... this whole situation could have been 3 deadd, maybe a police officer or two, but not 32 young adults barely beginning their lives on a course to better themselves and learning how to live like an adult........no I seriously doubt they went to class thinking that they wouldn't walk out of it.... and this is the schools fault for the sheer number killed. When they had this information hours ahead of time.... and decided to hide the threat because they didn't want to inconvience classes...... I bet you those students a professors would have rather made a day up in classes then be dead or going to some friend or colleguies funeral........ END OF DEBATE PEROID.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Geronimo


Why didn't the background check at gun purchase deny eligibility on the basis of this declaration? It seems this background check needs to be a lot more robust. I wonder what they think it can accomplish if it doesn't prevent someone found to be "an imminent danger" in court documents from legally purchasing multiple semiautomatic weapons without so much as a flag for follow up?

Presumably because the shrink report referenced by Arrian (IIRC) in an earlier post concluded he was not mentally ill. The examination criteria, the court process and the criteria for having these included in the Federal backgroun check database need to be examined.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Geronimo


Why didn't the background check at gun purchase deny eligibility on the basis of this declaration? It seems this background check needs to be a lot more robust. I wonder what they think it can accomplish if it doesn't prevent someone found to be "an imminent danger" in court documents from legally purchasing multiple semiautomatic weapons without so much as a flag for follow up?

That is obvious - he was only "an imminent danger" to himself, so he should of course still be able to defend himself from threats from other persons.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Geronimo
I'm suprised mtg and mobius haven't ended up on one or the others ignore list yet. Do they actually enjoy all this banter?

Given Moby's location field, I think my little fanboy does enjoy it. I only reply if I'm bored or find it idly entertaining, then he either wanders off with his tail between his legs if even he can see how big a fool he's made of himself, or he decides to get in the last word and feels good about himself for a bit.

Even if he wanders off with his tail between his legs (like 2-3 years of "Highway of Death" posts about the old gulf war) he will eventually come back in another thread and proclaim loudly for his own benefit how he kicked my arse.

It is mildly entertaining to have my own cybergroupie.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by BlackCat


That is obvious - he was only "an imminent danger" to himself, so he should of course still be able to defend himself from threats from other persons.

In another part of the form, Cho was described as "mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, and presents an imminent danger to self or others as a result of mental illness, or is so seriously mentally ill as to be substantially unable to care for self, and is incapable of volunteering or unwilling to volunteer for treatment."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/18/vtech.shooting/

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Thorn
You know, i'm suprised no one here has jumped on the obvious tradgedy here, not the gun control, failure of the mental health system, but the practical failure to enact any kind of evacuation plan for the students by the school administration who thought it produent to keep the shooting in the dorm a secret up until 9:00am even though they knew a hour earlier, finally at 9am they decided to mass email students about it, which didn't save people who were already headed or in classes.... this whole situation could have been 3 deadd, maybe a police officer or two, but not 32 young adults barely beginning their lives on a course to better themselves and learning how to live like an adult........no I seriously doubt they went to class thinking that they wouldn't walk out of it.... and this is the schools fault for the sheer number killed. When they had this information hours ahead of time.... and decided to hide the threat because they didn't want to inconvience classes...... I bet you those students a professors would have rather made a day up in classes then be dead or going to some friend or colleguies funeral........ END OF DEBATE PEROID.

QFT

I'm completely fed up with the typical "don't cause a panic" reaction to almost any violent incident that so often seems to take hold of administrators who should be busting their arses to alert everybody and anybody of the crisis as soon as it is detected. The Dorm shooting should have immediately closed down the school until the shooter was accounted for.

If they were nonetheless determined to keep the school open with the shooter at large they should at least have announced to the students that a shooter was still at large.

I hadn't realized it had taken root in this attack as well.

[Brutus66]

DS, I would categorize those incidents under dueling rather than random acts of violence.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

In another part of the form, Cho was described as "mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, and presents an imminent danger to self or others as a result of mental illness, or is so seriously mentally ill as to be substantially unable to care for self, and is incapable of volunteering or unwilling to volunteer for treatment."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/18/vtech.shooting/

Either that is a fake/joke or someone should reexamine how such a form is filled.

It seems quite idiotic with you quote and this (from same site) :

A box indicating that the subject "Presents an imminent danger to others as a result of mental illness" was not checked.

Still, does this prevent him from aquring a gun to protect himself ?

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Geronimo


QFT

I'm completely fed up with the typical "don't cause a panic" reaction to almost any violent incident that so often seems to take hold of administrators who should be busting their arses to alert everybody and anybody of the crisis as soon as it is detected. The Dorm shooting should have immediately closed down the school until the shooter was accounted for.

If they were nonetheless determined to keep the school open with the shooter at large they should at least have announced to the students that a shooter was still at large.

I hadn't realized it had taken root in this attack as well.

BS. The school and the area is something like a city with 20.000 inhabitants - you simply can't close down such.

[Thorn]

Oh yeah, lets take a high school for instance, a threat is made of a gun or bomb, not even a murder, but a threat is made, and they close every school in the district in lockdown until they view it is safe.

You telling me that they can't evacuate a large group of people, then why bother having evacuation plans at all, we should let everything be a free-for-all....... then eh survival of the fittist/luckiest.......

If this happend in washington DC in a govern't building you don't think that such plans would go into effect...... riiiiiiiiiight and there are many more thousands effected there......

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Shouting fire in a crowded theater, anyone? First Amendment rights are not absolute.

Your missing the operating word in that phrase - falsely - and he wasn't doing that anyway.

Being in a "public" building or facility doesn't give you some superseding right to go on a rant and interfere with the operation or conduct of business in that public building - try going to your local city hall, courthouse, or other government facility and ranting away about your First Amendment rights, and see how long you get to do that before being thrown out or arrested if you don't cooperate with being thrown out.

Was this "interference" sufficiently to override his speech rights and arrest him?