4-17-07-UPDATE: The Virginia legislature nixed a law that would have let these Vir. Tech students defend themselves… Gun bill gets shot down by panel HB 1572, which would have allowed handguns on college campuses, died in subcommittee.

A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly. House Bill 1572 didn’t get through the House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety. It died Monday in the subcommittee stage, the first of several hurdles bills must overcome before becoming laws.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. “I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.”

It is unfortunate that Rep. Rick Boucher's proposed expansion of the concealed weapons permits did not become law. Earlier this year the Virginia General Assembly failed to act on House Bill 1572.
If armed civilians had been present on the campus of Virginia Tech they could have stopped the murderous individual that killed over 30 people on Monday.

So whats y'r point?

This guy Cho did not mind committing murder, so what makes you think he would obey some law about carring concealed weapons?

...having more permits available might have saved lives albiet with tougher restrictions and more testing especially mental..., no kidding, because in the end only lawful people will follow the law...having restrictions on carrying weapons or owning weaponing does not stop in any way someone from doing what happened yesterday.

Even if Mr Boucher and Mr Stearns had gotten The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, VT is still shamefully a gun-free-zone.

Law Enforcement, airline piolets, educators, some folks just need to be armed.

I fail to see the connection to any of this? I don't think a nationwide recoprocity law would ave any affect on this incident. He voted for bills that would bar suing gun manufacturers when their products were misused? Is the writer implying that someone should sue Glock now? This is merely an example of someone tryign to advance their own personal agenda by linking a tragic event to it in order to gain attention. This writer should be banned.

So whats your point?

seems like a stand up guy...
He is on the right track too. With 220 million firearms in America, there is no way in hell htat we are going to stop people from getting them. Instead we nneed to arm people who are decent upstanding citizens against criminals.

Rep. Rick Boucher is a man that represents the majority of responsable americans about the right way to handle guns. If a professor or student would have been carrying a gun to stop this unstable person, it may saved a lot of lives.

I am sure a lot of people will use this tragedy to push their anti-gun politics. But to say this is the fault of the "gun" and there for we should outlaw guns would be the same as saying, "if we did not allow these forgieners into our country this would not have happened" so we should no longer allow forgieners into our country. This is a horrible, senseless act, to use it to forward a political ideology in my opinion would be morally wrong.

I do not see how one fact links with another.
1. This crazed gunman was not a concealed carry permit holder.
2. Concealed carry permit holders are not allowed on school campus

I think you are right in the middle of a logical fallacy.

The Virginia Tech massacre is a good example of why concealed carry permits should be recognized on campus.

The killer was shooting un-armed fish in a barrel.

It's a shame none of the victims were armed.

This is why "gun free zones" on College campus is nothing more than an illusion of safety.

If you want real safety, get a concealed weapon permit and become proficient with your firearm, and carry it with you at all times.

Nice...should be kicking his own rear end right now. One cannot legally carry a concealed weapon in S. Korea and no school shootings ever...hmmm coincidence?? I THINK NOT!!

Well the other side is obviously, if the massacred students were permitted to carry concealed weapons would this tragedy have ended much earlier, or perhaps not at all?

Maybe this lunatic gets popped before he draws his pistol fully? Who knows, all I know is if an evil person is commited to doing an evil act, gun laws won't stop him. If we take away guns the only ones with guns left are the criminals and we're lambs to the slaughter.

What's the relevance of concealed weapons permits to the Virginia Tech murders? If anything, allowing permit holders to carry on campus might have prevented some bloodshed. If this reporter's intent is to imply some kind of connection between permit holders, the NRA, or Boucher to the whacko student, I think that's pretty disingenuous. Why must we politicize this issue? Gun control can't prevent these crimes and arming everybody can't either.

BET THEY WISH THEY WOULD HAVE PASSED THAT LAW NOW. YOU LIBERAL'S ARE PUTTING US ALL IN DANGER.

If the US in fact had a true "gun culture" like we did in the early 1900s when every 3rd person was carrying a side-arm or pearl-handled pistol in a purse. This guy wouldn't have made it past the 3rd victim.

Just because the average US citizen isn't smart enough to put together a bird feeder... let alone create a functioning hand gun, doesn't mean it can't be done with a few machining tools at any local shop. If we spend a lot of needless energy trying to rid the land of guns, it only assures that the next maniac will get to 40, 50, or 60 people before someone has the ability to put an end to it.

As a graduate student and a gun owner, I just want to say I think it is irresponsible to blame Congressman Boucher for only supporting policies which his constituents elected him to support. The actions taken by the gunman at VT serve as a reminder that random acts of violence are situations which require us to be reactive in nature, reactive in immediate response, and in subsequent political debate. This is the United States of America, and as citizens, we are entitled by the Consitution to possess firearms. The shootings at Virginia Tech serve as a tragic reminder that in a free society, laws cannot ultimately prevent the acts of desperate men. The focus should be on why were these crimes committed rather than how.

Robert B. Kramer III, MPA
BA Criminology

If only the ban had been lifted it is possible someone may have been able to stop this killer. I am glad to see it was a Democratic Congressman who pushed for the repeal. This shows that gun rights for responsible, law abiding citizens is a bipartisan issue.

Truly amazing story - Just
$571 for 33 lives? Such a deal! The NRA and all of its supporters of no gun control should be proud!!! Sure hope a background check of the purchaser doesn't reveal anything "odd" UNBELIEVABLE!!!

Since Cho did not have a CCW permit, how exactly is this relevant?

Boucher should be voted out of office for supporting the gun lobby over ordinary citizens. Some freedom we have here in America. We have the freedom to get shot in our schools and streets, the freedom to have no health insurance, the freedom to be accosted by foul mouth media pundits, etc.

Did the murderer in this story have a concealed carry permit, NO, next subject please...

its too bad the congressman could'nt get that bill passed,it maybey could haved saved lives.
the only way to stop a determined madman with a firearm is with equal or greater force.
now is the time to quit paying attention to all of the emoting oprahs out there,stand up and be MEN and fight back

i know ABC is really tring hard to make this a "gun control" issue (it was obvious from coverage yesterday.

Fact is, concealed weapons is probably the only thing that would have stopped this madman...

A person who wanted to kill would have bought a gun illegally..

Now, thanks to irresponsible "NO More GUNS" advocates like ABC, here we are in a situation, where students couldn't defend themselves..

What on earth does concealed carry have to do with this horrific crime? The criminal who committed this atrocity was not deterred in any way or fashion by any gun control measure.

Indeed, if gun rights measures like the one proposed by Rep Boucher were enacted more widely, there might have been an armed response, or the criminal might have chosen not to shoot up a campus.

Shame on ABC for suggesting CCW, magazine capacity, or any other manifestation of gun rights for law abiding citizens had anything to do with this tragedy.

Shamefull is the editorial slant of ABC News. The "yellow journalism" that passes for "mainstream" these days is sickening. Stop blaming the instrument and start trying to understand the person who used the instrument to commit this crime.

"having restrictions on carrying weapons or owning weaponing does not stop in any way someone from doing what happened yesterday."

huh? how would this kid have gotten a gun otherwise? it's not like they're lying around for the taking. I'm tired of this argument from gun proponents (guns don't kill people, people kill people). it's bogus. it's a lot harder to kill 37 people with a knife.

Allowing concealed weapons on college campuses has came up in several states such as Kansas and Utah, maybe this congressman hasn't done enough maybe they should be allowed is colleges. A horrible thing happened that took the lives of 31 young and innocent people. Its possible however that allowing concealed weapons in more locations could stop or prevent violent crimes such as this one from occuring.

Since Cho didn't have a CCW permit, how is this relevant?

Wow...Boucher oughtta be kickin his own rear end. Expand weapons permits for a $60,000 contribution? Obviously the more restricted permits are working well in his state! NOT! Maybe he should rethink this issue and act like a grown up! Definitely keeping my teenage daughter from going anywhere NEAR his state at college time!

Arm everyone and then you get the wild west or Iraq or you can start to make it very, very difficult to continue with this national fetish of guns and ammo. I don't think arming educators (!) and "piolets" is always the answer.

I just took the MMPI test, I feel that would help filter out the good people from the bad people. Everyone that carrys a weapon has to take this test, from armed guards to policemen, why not the ones the are buying a weapon too.

Making schools "gun free zones" tells every evil person and deranged lunatic that he/she has a pool full of sitting ducks to brutalize. Why are American policy makers so deluded to think that words on paper can stop criminals such as this? If some of those poor students and professors were allowed to carry arms, they would have at least had a chance to stop him.

oh great.. the witch hunt begins

No wonder our country is so violent. We want guns like we want our burgers and fries. We're reaping what we sow.

I agree with the NRA that "guns don't kill people, people kill people..." But everytime a tragedy like this happens, I wonder why this country continues to allow criminals, the mentally unstable, and even normal folks to buy semi-automatic weapons. These weapons are designed to kill many, many, people at one time. A lot less innocent lives (or maybe none at all) would have been lost if Cho only had access to a hunting rifle.

"Boucher's bill would not allow concealed weapons on school campuses." How does this quote from the article reconcile with the article's title? Great jour.. I mean sensationalism!

Why is ABC continuing to let Jake Tapper report on gun-related stories despite his past affiliation with Handgun Control Inc? Would you consider it responsible journalism to hire Wayne Lapierre of the NRA to write on gun issues? Why does Mr. Tapper get a pass on this?

As a Military MP I have tremendous fear of the ability for anyone with a license to carry a concealed weapon into a school zone. Even with the best intentions what is to say that a citizen with a weapon has the judgement to know who, and when, to shoot? Did they shoot someone who was homicidal? Or just mentally ill and carrying something that looked similar to a weapon? It takes years and years of training to properly react in a high stress situation like this. To say that an armed citizen could have prevented this massacre is to say that we could resolve the situation in Iraq if everyone involved just sat down for a conversation.

In addition why should we believe that someone that is not a law enforcement agent and has never been trained to deal with these situations would actually hit the perpetrator and not instead miss and cause further harm? Perhaps their posession of a weapon would quickly escalate the intentions of the criminal that now feels like they've been cornered.

It is incredibly naive and irresponsible to assert that an armed citizen could have prevented this situation. It is even worse to assume that armed citizens should act as their own police/military force in these situations.

Imagine how many armed civilians would be shot down by law enforcement in the confusion of entering chaos with weapons everywhere. Who is the bad guy? Who is the good samaritan ...

Exactly! No guns! Let law enforcement do their job and parents properly raise their children!

Would someone care to explain to me what simplifying the right to legally carry a concealed weapon has to do with the acts commited by an obviously disturbed individual? An individual who has a concealed carry permit has undergone extensive background checks to obtain it, and can lose it for a variety of reasons. The proposed act would only make it a little more convenient, since many states already grant reciprocity anyway. Trying to make this kind of connection is "journalism" at its worst. If someone had a concealed weapon they would at least have had a chance to stop this individual.

And America never learns since it is blinded by this phenomenal passion for guns. It will happen again as time will show. Unfortunately.

Great, Let's all carry weapons like the good 'ol days of the Wild West! In the internet age, only police should have weapons than kill so quickly. And it was less than $600. Hmm. that is 3 to 4 hours of counseling at the standard rate.

Also, I am 100% sure college students will try to go to class packing a gun, just in case. They should release the grisly head shots of the deceased. We need to see what damage any gun does. But that will never happen.

Sure if everyone had concealed weapons, someone MAY have been able to stop the shooter. They also MAY have gotten more people killed--their gun MAY have jammed, they MAY have missed, they MAY have provoked someone else with a gun and MAY have started an all out gunfight---who knows? This isn't the wild west and the answer isn't more guns---it's less. If guns weren't so readily available to pretty much anyone, this kid wouldn't have gotten one and that was the only certain way that all these students wouldn't have all died yesterday.

When Wyatt Earp brought safety to Dodge City he did so by banning citizens from carrying guns in town. 130 years later and we haven't learned our lesson. I'm a gun own and I think we need sensible gun control!

What is the point of this article? ABC is pushing the Brady Lobby-line pretty hard less than 24 hours after the carnage. Tacky to say the least.

The prohibitionist propaganda pushed by groups like the Brady-bunch are exactly what is wrong with our country. These groups' ultimate aim in banning all guns, much like the puritanical anti-drug crowd, are way off the mark.

For example, look at the 1st Amendment. Similar to the harms caused by the haters in our society (e.g., Don Imus, Howard Stern, Shabazz, Farakhan, etc.), we tolerate their speech b/c the Constitution's free speech guarantees are unequivocal. The same goes for the 2nd Amendment. For every nut that goes out and blasts innocent people in our society there are 100 people that protected their families or others (every day) b/c of their right to bear arms.

Just imagine if our country is attacked again by terrorists and chaos engulfs our nation. What happens when our private citizen's are unable to possess certain weapons to defend themselves (i.e., like in NYC or D.C., California, Hawaii, or Mass., etc.)? Who are you going to call when there are no police to call? DURING A TIME OF CRISIS, THE GOV'T WILL TELL YOU THAT YOU MUST HELP YOURSELF.

Wow what a biased piece of junk article. Is the author some how trying to link this shooter to a law abiding CCW holder? Thought I was on CBS for a second. Did you pay for this article?

Lets see, if gun control would prevent crazies from killing - I guess banning fertilizer would have prevented the OK massacre and outlawing food will save people from eating themselves to death. Or maybe we should ban cars, after all, cars kill more people per year than have been killed by private citizens with guns for the past 50 years conmbined!

If this doesen't make sense to you then you must not be a liberal!

After this tragedy, how can anyone NOT advocate the outlawing of semi-automatic weapons?

We must work for peace, not expand laws that will only result in more bloodshed in the future.

The fact that VT was a gun free zone was not overlooked by the killer. His chances of being shot by someone defending themselves was 25,000 to 1. The students and faculty were sitting ducks. The only thing that could have saved them was a armed citizen.

We are deluding ourselves if we think that we can make our college campuses gun-free. The criminals all have weapons, so an armed & trained private citizenry levels the playing field when it comes to terrorists on campus.

Oh come on ABC! That was lame.

Virginia Tech prohibited its students, faculty and staff from bringing their licensed and lawfully concealed firearms onto the campus. This guaranteed a safe environment for the gunman who was able to murder 32 disarmed and defenseless victims.

From Wikipedia:
--Begin quote--
Virginia HB 1572, intended to prohibit public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit ... from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun" was introduced into the Virginia House of Representatives by delegate Todd Gilbert. The university opposed the bill, which died in subcommittee in January of 2006. Spokesman Larry Hincker responded "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."[131]
-- End quote--

I am sure Mr. Larry Hincker is FEELING quite safe now.

I guess CCW is the new buzzword amongst the right-wing dimwits. They must have heard it on talk radio and like a bunch of circus clowns start parroting it. Also, they must fantasize themselves as John Wayne or some cowboys from a sphagetti western who are almost invincible. NRA Wussies, do I have some news for you? If it were so easy for CCW holders to defend themselves and others we wouldn't be seeing two cops killed in a police station last month.
I am sure a toddler in most countries could figure out that making sure there were fewer guns available in a society is directly related to safety of the individual. America is an industrialized society on the outside but completely neanderthal on the inside. That is the only explanation I can think of as to why most Americans do not seem to get the connection between guns and killings. Do they think that guns are for picking noses? I am sure there are some rednecks in the NRA who do that :-)

I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
I LEGALLY carry concealed and salute Boucher on hisguts to stand up against crime and the anti-ghunners (same thing).

Gun control is not the answer to preventing the VT tragedy. I firmly believe criminals will always find ways to have guns. Anyone with a Concealed Pistol License has to go through shooting training and gun safety class. They know how to safely carry and shoot their gun. A CPL holder also has his finger prints filed with the FBI. They are law abiding citizens. It is interesting that the serial numbers were filed off the weapons used at the VT shooting. That is a crime in itself. I know as a CPL holder, and an expert shot, I could defend myself and other innocent people in a dangerous situation. Instead of more gun restrictions, lets train the people that have CPL's to be prepared for situations in which they may need to defend themselves and others. I think people would be surprised at the caliber of people that possess a concealed pistol license, may of them I would trust to act appropriately in a situation such as the VT shooting. I agree with the fact that a criminal knows he will have a better chance of no resistance in a place where guns are prohibited.

I do see the point made by 'Dusty' - however some people may forget that Cho Seung-hui was not a criminal until monday morning and therefore had every right (according to present US.law) to own guns.

That a lot of career-criminals have high-tech weaponry from the black market is not an issue with this case as they can be sought out, arrested, convicted, etc.

Until some company invents a gun that can only be fired against criminals it has to be controlled - for the sake of the nation (and by nation i do not mean the capital interests)

Unstable individuals with ill intentions will always have a way and means to cause harm to others. Restricting guns from law abiding indivuals just prevents those from defending themselves and those they love. Maryland should pass a concealed weapons law, Maryland criminals are already packing so why not the lawful citizens before god forbid it happens here.

If you think that the police are so "well trained" that they are the only ones who deserve gun you obviously haven't seen the numerous videos on youtube of police mishandling their weapons...or the one about how the police confiscated law abiding citizens guns during katrina and then told them they were on their own to protect themselves againt roving bands of criminals WITH GUNS. Katrina is the example we all should use to realize when the SHTF the cops will be using their weapons to protect themselves and their family. Arming citizens isn't the best thing in the world but it is our only option in a world of wackos. DO NOT RELY ON POLICE FOR PROTECTION, DEFEND YOURSELF.

Sure, criminals will find a way.
The thing is:
Cho Seung-hui was no criminal and would have been entitled to also carry - not that he ever applied.

If restricted to a black market he might have been arrested for buying the gun, clips or ammo - or not using a gun which would almost certainly have produced a lot less casualties.

I don't agree that "he most certainly couldn't have caused as many deaths"...There are hundreds if not thousands of students on campus walking around at any given time. Someone in a car or an even larger veichle could easliy run over and injure just as many people with the same mentality. What about the bomb threats that this school had been facing...certainly a bomb could cause just as many deaths. There are other ways to accomplish the same goal, it just so happens that tv and movies make gunfights look "cool" without showing all the blood and suffering that the victims and their families go through. I agree with Kramer that we should be looking at the root of this problem: WHY WAS HE SO DEPRESSED?, Why didn't anyone make sure he got help? So many people noticed problems he was having but it was easier to just ignore him rather than help him.

All of these defensive responses to gun control ... I think I smell a coordinated NRA membership campaign on this bulletin board.

No right-thinking, rational individual can believe we would all be safer if we were all armed.

Guns, especially concealable firearms, should require not only licenses but training courses to get them. They should be stored at a local police headquarters and checked out on an as-needed basis.

Despite what the rabid arm-o-philes say, there is no right to guns in this country. Even if one takes the Bill of Rights at face value, it says a "right to bear arms," not guns. If we can legislate against folks walking around with machine guns, hand grenades and cross bows (yes, cross bows are illegal almost everywhere), then we can legally and constitutionally legislate against fire arms.

It's not coincidence that other countries have both MUCH stricter control of guns and incidents like this are extremely rare outside of the United States. As an Italian paper said yesterday, this type of incident is as American as apple pie.

It's ignorant to compare a country with a population of less than 60 million people with one of more than 300 million. So how exactly would a firearm help if you had to go and check it out to use it. oh and one more point...CROSSBOWS ARE NOT ILLEGAL EVERYWHERE. It is legal to own a crossbow, it is illegal to hunt with one unless you have an exemption due to a handicap. I think the biggest problem is that most liberals don't really know the laws concerning firearms and therefore make very ignorant statements like the FBI agent on MSNBC saying that having 50 rounds of ammo is a lot and that it is unheard of. By the way I would consider myself a liberal on every issue except gun control.

How tyical, There is a tragedy, and the liberals and leftists are there to try to take avantage of it, regardless of the lack of taste. If they can score points, they DO NOT CARE. They want to make POLITICAL HAY!. It is a disgusting practice that everyone ought to remember the next time one of these people asks for support.

It may be true that one political wing is trying to make 'political hay' on this tragic incident.

What may also be true is that the gun-advocates are trying (and for the moment succeeds) in making a huge pile of money on all the scared, stupid, confused and evil people out there - and completely ignoring their victims.

I hope the highly payed, professional, pro-gun debaters consider this;
Your family could be the next victims in line - and not any amount of guns will protect them if the maniac chooses them as first targets.

They are the 'Benedict Arnold's' of modern USA - giving the nation away to the gun manufacturers.

Thank you ABC and Justin Rood for bringing this important information to light. This article is obviously not an attempt to capitalize on the VT tragedy but to get at the underlying causes, of which there are many. Timely reporting.

"They also MAY have gotten more people killed--their gun MAY have jammed, they MAY have missed, they MAY have provoked someone else with a gun and MAY have started an all out gunfight---who knows? This isn't the wild west and the answer isn't more guns--"
Yes, it was so much better the way it was. Let's not defend ourselves, we might hurt ourselves. Just let the killers kill us. (Black market guns if necessary.)

I read all of the e-mails sent and both sides have convincing arguments. However, I too have a CCW license and can only wonder what that scum Hui would have done if those kids or a professor would have started shooting back!
I feel once you pass a background check with FBI or whoever, you should be able to carry with no restrictions. I am tired of these people shooting down innocent victims without any fear. They pick and choose locations where they know their victims will not be armed and the police will not be around. The right to bear arms for what? Enough is enough, let's do what we have to do.

I have read all the posts here. What is AMAZING is all the people that say "look at European countries. They have super-strict gun laws and it benefits them." What!? Australia would have you believe that it's gun laws work, because there are fewer "gun related deaths". The criminals have the guns, and have been robbing unarmed people on the street & in their homes BECAUSE they know no one is armed. Look at the numbers people. It is a FACT that states with more LEGAL gun carriers, show MUCH lower crime rates.
This qupte by "Josh" made me laugh..."Guns, especially concealable firearms, should require not only licenses but training courses to get them. They should be stored at a local police headquarters and checked out on an as-needed basis."
OK Josh, when someone breaks into your house and plans on robbing, then killing you, you just call the local police department and ask them for your gun. Oh, and hope the intruder will wait around for the police to show up.
Countries that say their gun control laws have helped the gen. pop., are being dishonest. Do your own research & look at the numbers. Dis-arming people will ONLY maker it easier for the criminals.

Sorry Josh, it was a quote from Lloyd Bowman. Apologies..

OK, we will look at the numbers and facts;

Fact: Every western country has a lower homicide rate than the US.
(a total look at eg. the Scandinavian countries shows a x 15 homicide rate / capita, in dis-favor of the US.)
Fact: Most of the police in the UK is unarmed because the criminals just have knives and replica-guns.
Fact: Oh, and yes, the strict gun-laws of Europe ARE benefiting the people there - as less of them are killed than in the US. (that should be an obvious benefit)

Persnally i would rather be robbed and live than shot and THEN robbed because the robber thought i might carry a gun.

I am willing to admit that career criminals will still get their 'tools' but black market is a risk of its own - and many 'legal' guns flow to the BM as they get stolen, lost or sold under false pretence.
Furthermore a ban would lower all the tragic cases of succesful suicides and accidents - and no the solution to that is not "more guns".

There is one fact remaining;
Less guns = less homicides.

Raid -

That's a nice fairy tale but let's stop making stuff up now. A gun ban will lower successful suicides? Where are you getting this? You admit criminals will get guns. Why do you want to disarm their victims? You must be a career criminal because this type of legislation would benefit criminals greatly.

Personally if I am being robbed I would rather have a gun than a cell phone. You want to trust ALL of your personal safety to your local police? You funny. You know, when seconds count its good to know that the police are only 5 minutes away.

Please enjoy your freedom to let others manage your personal safety. Please respect my freedom to ensure my own.

Yes, let's ban guns in area that do not have metal detectors, do not have fences, and do not have a significant number of armed guards, what an excellent idea.

Either you have the right to self defense, or you don't. If you have the right to self defense, you have to have the right to the means of self defense, which essentially means a hand gun, at least until you can get to your rifle or shotgun You folks who want to ban guns and think you will stop crime, hey what planet are you on. I want to ban auto accidents, food poisoning, and stupidity, but unfortunately I cannot make you drive better, I cannot make you learn how to cook, and I cannot make you any smarter than you are. Here's a question for you antigun nuts, name me a people who were the victims of genocide who were allowed to have guns. If you can name just one, I might c