it happend 2 or 3 days ago...

Yeah, I saw on the news last night that the ONLY background check is that for a criminal record, and even then they only really care if its been something violent or involving a weapon. The owner of the store where the shooter bought his weapon went on record saying: 'the sale went like thousands of others, he looked like all the other college boys that buy guns, there wasn't any reason for me not to sell him a weapon'.

He walked into a Roanoke, Va, gun shop on March 13th and walked out with a Glock 9mm pistol and a box of practice ammunition by producing the necessary three forms of valid id and clearing the NCIC check.
He later bought the .22 at a pawn shop.

There's not even a waiting period in Virginia. Dateline reported last night also that "many of the guns used in crimes in New York City are purchased in Virginia."
Our attorney general has already initmated that he wouldn't expect any laws to necessarily change based on the massacre because of the constitutional issues it raises. In an interview he noted that it was "too early to discuss such matters...we don't even know how he obtained the weapons at this point." Which was funny, because the news already knew, yet he didn't, and, (guess what?), it's his motherfucking job to fucking know.

So, let's continue on with this "constitutional" protection theme, shall we?

Some of you may have seen the interviews with one of his English professors.
She eventually had to teach him separate from the rest of the class because he was weirding everyone out. Before this, she repeatedly approached the Dean, Student Affairs, and so on, about her concern over his persistently violent writings. VA Tech officials emphatically told her over and over that he was free to write whatever as long as he wasn't writing in the first person, that it was a free speech issue, and that the professor should only grade him based on his writing skills and not the content.
Additionaly, he recently set fire to a dorm room and was sent to counseling in 2005 for stalking two female students.

so why should the actions of a mentally unstable wackjob be responsible abolishing the constitutional right of almost 300 million non-whackjobs?

Well spotted, sir. That's got to be one of the most chickenshit excuses for not doing the job you're paid to do I've ever heard.

i wonder if his stories were any good

ha, my old school (in another continent) used to conduct psychiatric exams of all admitted students. i am happy to report i did pass. a couple of people were pulled aside every year & their entranced delayed unless they got some kind of treatment i think.

here in america this is not done, & i wonder why, because i've seen my share of lunatics in college, and when i say lunatics i'm not joking. privacy my ass, locos can bea threat & they need to be watched.

ha, i said i would not post here, but these recent developments (a wackjob who had been identified but nothing was done about it) changed my mind.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

the profs knew about him, the students were all scared of him, he had been reported but "nothing could be done".

strange laws...

sorry for my non american stance here but 1, its a tragedy, very very sad. horrible event in virginia. heartfelt feelings to all the victims, survivors and thei families.....

2. the constitutional right to bear arms, this is a very old old right. this will not change but surely there should be more legislation...
in virginia anyone can buy a gun if they are over 16 but for security reasons, they can buy only one gun........................... PER MONTH!!! to me, being from a country where you can buy a gun (shotgun, rifle, not pistols) with a long winded drawn out police check, identification check, criminal records, big licence fee renewable yearly, etc ec etc, that per month thing sounds daft....
surely sense will prevail at some stage. im not saying me shouldnt bear arms, im just saying men with the capability of killing with arms should be at the last not given a fucking free for all in the weapon shop!

\

Great question.

and they did do the required background check.
those things do not check for "odd behaviour'

there is no law and should be no law against acting "strange"

what there shoud be is vigilance.

What this partially shows you is the result of alienation in our oh-so-superior contemporary society. We post these notes and pretend its "community".

In case anyone cares, that dudes play is posted at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...071vtech1.html

mang, he was a shitty writer, he mentioned to say "catholic priest", "michael jackson", "conspiracy", "john lennon" and "marilyn monroe" all in a single page!

there's no law that says people are entitled to push the limits of an educational institution, are they?

out of a class of 70 people, 63 skipped class because they were afraid of him (see w. post article about nikki giovanni). one faculty member had to tutor him in private to avoid inconveniencing the other teachers.

this is the time when you should make registration contingent on having your head checked.

--

just imagine if he was in the nuclear engineering program instead of english

also, he accused his stepdad of wanting to get
in his mom's "pant" from the beginning.
although maybe that error was intentional,
meant to illustrate the poor boys erratic
mindset, that he was losing his grasp on
basic language skills.

nah...he was just a shit writer.

yep yep. the final lines of his "play" are:

that poor asshole needed an intervention. he was evidently crazy. how do people like that slip through the cracks, i don't know.

you are correct, but that is why I said we need vigilance. he is in a university. plenty of crazy shit gores down at universities, with freaks and weirdos galore, loners, psychos, etc.

I printed out his plays yesterday and read them. they were ridiculously psycho. stupid and forced and horrible and seemed like a 13 year old was writing them.

ok, could you explain "vigilance" in concrete terms? you think also people who are disturbed should have admission contingent on not being a danger to others? there's a difference between a psychiatrist's assessment and a cop's "he hasn't done anything yet"

I agree with this, and I think that this is more the root of the issue than the availability of guns.

I also think that this explains why there is a greater frequency of these acts in America. we do not have the same sense of community as most countries. hell, I don't even know my next door neighbors all that well...

disassociation amongst peers and the community is a byproduct of our times. look at how people treat each other on the internet? it's like road rage brought on from lack of tangible connection to those around you.

the only solution any of us here could hope to bring, would be a stronger dedication toward treating your fellow man better. you can't fix crazy, and I don't think that "being treated better" would have stopped this individual, but hopefully some sort of offset can be achieved.

god, I sound like a hippy now. :(