BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Terror
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
Massacre Gun: $571 for 9 mm Glock and 50 Bullets at Roanoke Store
April 17, 2007 2:59 PM
Seung-Hui Cho bought his first gun, a 9mm handgun, on March 13 at a Roanoke, Va. gun store, the owner tells ABC News.
John Markell, the owner of Roanoke Firearms, said today that he had been interviewed by three agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms about Cho's purchase of a Glock 9 mm handgun.
"I feel terrible about this," Markell told ABC News at his store today, which is part gun shop, part pawn shop on the outskirts of Roanoke.
THE BLOTTER RECOMMENDS
Markell said Cho's gun and a box of 50 bullets cost $571. He said Cho paid by credit card and left the store with the gun.
Markell said Cho was "a clean-cut college kid," and the transaction was entirely legal under Virginia law. "He was as cordial as could be, and there was nothing unusual in his manner that suggested any thing wrong," Markell said.
Markell said he was not present when Cho bought the gun, but that he had produced a state driver's license and an immigration card.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
Law enforcement officials tell ABC News Cho bought his second weapon, a .22 caliber handgun, also in Virginia, within the last week.
"This was no spur of the moment crime. He's been thinking about this since at least the time he bought the first gun," said former FBI agent Brad Garrett, an ABC News consultant.
Under Virginia law, state residents can only buy one handgun in any 30-day period, suggesting Cho bought his second weapon after April 13 or sometime over the weekend.
"He clearly spent some time figuring out how he was going to take care of business once classes began on Monday morning," said Garrett.
The date of the first gun purchase will likely serve as the time of "some triggering mechanism that was very important" to Cho said Garrett, an expert on profiling murderers.
April 17, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (343)
gun control. Will we ever learn?
The NRA could care less. Geroge
Bush could care less.
Jack
Jacksonville Beach, Fl.
Posted by: jack | Apr 17, 2007 3:15:13 PM
This is a situation in our society. how does one stop a guy like Cho from mass killings when everything he has done up to that point, he has done legal?
Posted by: RMK | Apr 17, 2007 3:20:18 PM
So, this 571.00 gun/ammo was in a safe place where anyone with a drivers license and id card could buy it. If this gun had been bought by a civilan who was licensed to carry and the guts to follow through with using it we would probably be hailing him as the person that saved lives. If guns were banned... then this youngster probably would have gotten it through one of the black market people that are around and the licensed concealed carry couldn't buy it, we would still have the same savage rampage where the gunman walks into a "SAFE ZONE" and kills people. Why aren't there more honest, law-abiding citizens taught how to carry and use a gun and then give them a gun if you have to so they can help protect themselves, their family and the people around them from people like this. I wonder.
Posted by: Robert Falls | Apr 17, 2007 3:22:25 PM
With everyone so lawsuit crazy, one or more persons now will file lawsuits against the stores that sold the guns and the companies that made them. Those lawsuits will most likely be class-action since the guns killed 32 people.
Posted by: Chet Cuccia | Apr 17, 2007 3:23:47 PM
Why does stuff like this keep happening? We are not safe anywhere. What a shame. The 60's were great. Never locked doors, windows, walked the streets until dark. All I can say we are always going to be in danger.
Posted by: kelly | Apr 17, 2007 3:25:55 PM
Why does stuff like this keep happening? We are not safe anywhere. What a shame. The 60's were great. Never locked doors, windows, walked the streets until dark. All I can say we are always going to be in danger.
Posted by: kelly | Apr 17, 2007 3:27:04 PM
And why is the headline important, even relevant, to the story?
It isn't.
Let's get off the "anti-gun" propaganda wagon and get down to real, professional journalism.
Posted by: Robert Reese | Apr 17, 2007 3:29:40 PM
And why is the headline important, even relevant, to the story?
It isn't.
Let's get off the "anti-gun" propaganda wagon and get down to real, professional journalism.
Posted by: Robert Reese | Apr 17, 2007 3:31:29 PM
you want to know what i think he was sick and not smart and on top of that he kill him self. poeple like that should be put in jail if they think they can get away with this. he was crazy to do this that what i think
Posted by: sarah | Apr 17, 2007 3:31:44 PM
"I feel terrible about this," Markell told ABC News at his store today, which is part gun shop, part pawn shop on the outskirts of Roanoke.
IF YOU FEEL SO BADLY THEN STOP SELLING GUNS!!!
Posted by: James | Apr 17, 2007 3:32:12 PM
I guess this shows that waiting periods and other gun control measures did nothing to stop a committed murderer. Time to let law abiding citizens defend themselves!
Posted by: John Browning | Apr 17, 2007 3:33:25 PM
he was sick and crazy just to kill everyone and him self for just get what he want and he got a lot of plan for everyone
Posted by: sarah | Apr 17, 2007 3:34:07 PM
We need stricter laws in all of our states. The gun was not the problem. The person behind the gun is the problem. Guns save lives if used correctly. I feel the school along with the officers of the state did not do all they could to save the lives of the innocent, I must say the officers protected themselfes and their vehicles well. While the kids inside the school had no protection. I am just sick over this. Hope that all that did not do as much as they could lose more than they gain.
Posted by: Lisa Robinson | Apr 17, 2007 3:34:42 PM
Why would we allow a non-citizen to own a gun in the U.S.? I have no problem with legal citizens owning guns but not someone who is not a U.S. citizen. We do not allow non-citizens to vote....why should they be allow to own a gun?
Posted by: Harold Richards | Apr 17, 2007 3:36:10 PM
The first question that should be asked here rather than what weapon , clip size, etc. is how does a foreign national purchase a weapon in the first place.
Leave us law abiding citizens out of this. Regardless of what weapon or clip size we do not commit such heinous acts.
Nuff said!
Posted by: J Peterson | Apr 17, 2007 3:41:12 PM
Sorry for the lawsuits coming is all. You got to remember, this is this guy's living.
Posted by: Seaweed | Apr 17, 2007 3:41:31 PM
I would like to send my deepest sympathy to all the families of the students who's life was tragically ended yesterday at Virginia Tech.
Posted by: Uraina Rouse | Apr 17, 2007 3:50:43 PM
First!!
Posted by: Puff_Jacket_Kid_76 | Apr 17, 2007 3:51:54 PM
I just wanted to say that everyone there at VT is in my prayers and thoughts. I think it is a little ridiculous for something like this to happen. You just can not say that u know people these days. They will go off and do anything. Some have to be prevoced. I never attended VT or had anyone there that I personally knew but my heart goes out to everyone that is there and for the families.
MUCH LOVE FROM BLACKSTONE,VA.
Posted by: April Hawker | Apr 17, 2007 3:55:12 PM
The faster we can pass laws to liberalize the purchase requirements & ownership laws of guns, especially to the 18-25 year old crowd and to cordial foreign nationals, the more safer we'll be cuz more people will have more guns.
Posted by: PretzelLogicizer | Apr 17, 2007 3:55:47 PM
Over the years, we have been experiencing nothing but gun shootings in the schools in the U.S. Middle schools, High Schools,
College Campuses. The last one was Columbine High School, 15 people were killed in that massacre. Yesterday 32 people were killed in the massacre at Virginia Tech. That's double than Columbine. When is this going to stop? Why congress hasn't come up with a law that prohibits people to buying guns? I have 2 children, and I want to be at peace everyday knowing that they are going to be safe at school, not fearing for their lives.
Posted by: Patty Burkhardt | Apr 17, 2007 3:57:08 PM
Why are we focusing so much on the guns? If Cho had planned this far in advance, and was so completely committed to this massacre + suicide, he'd have gotten the weapons any way he could. It upsets me that the media seems to be spinning this towards the "gun control" angle, and we should clearly think more about WHY someone does something like this, and especially why nobody close to him was able to see this coming.
There are more deadly means available to the determined (and unstable) citizens than mere handguns; controlling them is simply an attempt to treat the symptom, not the disease.
Posted by: KDK | Apr 17, 2007 3:58:15 PM
how could he get off that many shots before someone brought him down. Withf all the new gun laws we only have bad guys with guns..
if a few people were packing weapons he would only have killed a few...
Posted by: Jake Knapp | Apr 17, 2007 4:01:29 PM
Did those "bullets" come with the cases, gunpowder, and primers? Or was he a handloader?
Posted by: jim mccracken | Apr 17, 2007 4:03:50 PM
You people should be ashamed of yourselves. To blame the president of Va.Tech for not being faster notifying the students is ridiculous. He probably did it as fast as he was able. As far as the rest of the happening,no one could have known a student was going to murder anyone else, and I doubt that the campus could have been locked down before that happened. I grant you that this was a terrible thing and it is normal for you to cover in your usual fashion, but I am thoroughly disgusted with you for the way you have handled it! Try to do better in the future.
Posted by: James Brunk | Apr 17, 2007 4:09:51 PM
I was under the impression that there was a mandatory waiting period between the purchase of a gun and taking it home. I'm not a gun owner or user and I would appreciate an explanation of the federal laws vs state laws around the purchase of gun.
Thanks! Dee
Posted by: Dee Robertson-Phillips | Apr 17, 2007 4:13:33 PM
I would think purchasing guns and ammunition for a total of $571 would send a red flag to the store owner...the authorities should have been alerted and the suspect questioned.
Posted by: Cheryl Lahoda | Apr 17, 2007 4:13:39 PM
Why are non-US citizens allowed to buy guns?
Posted by: K | Apr 17, 2007 4:17:31 PM
Now, the Glock 9mm is a gun that is capable of passing through metal detectors. And the kid had multiple clips on his vest (not clear whether they were extended capacity or not). Right there, you got a kid purchasing significant firepower. He had more than 1 box of rounds, thats probable. I would be asking: why didn't the gun shop owner notify police? You don't buy multiple clips (maybe 6-10) unless you're going after serious action. I talked to gun owning friends, and we agree this would be a red flag that should have been reported to authorities. Where did he purchase those clips? From this gun dealer? Probably.
Posted by: Anonymous | Apr 17, 2007 4:17:34 PM
Virginia has had an instant background check on all weapon purchases since 1989--predating the federal instant check by nine years.
You're wrong of course on the magazine ban. Only the sale of new magazines was banned under the 1994 federal law.
More facts, less sanctimonious editorializing.
Posted by: Bob Darden | Apr 17, 2007 4:18:32 PM
Now, the Glock 9mm is a gun that is capable of passing through metal detectors. And the kid had multiple clips on his vest (not clear whether they were extended capacity or not). Right there, you got a kid purchasing significant firepower. He had more than 1 box of rounds, thats probable. I would be asking: why didn't the gun shop owner notify police? You don't buy multiple clips (maybe 6-10) unless you're going after serious action. I talked to gun owning friends, and we agree this would be a red flag that should have been reported to authorities. Where did he purchase those clips? From this gun dealer? Probably.
Posted by: A Nonymous | Apr 17, 2007 4:19:22 PM
Psychic ex-FBI agent? Since when is the FBI hiring clairvoyants? Or maybe this "expert on profiling" is just taking through his hat which is more likely. What a job -- you can just make up any sort of bull story you like about Cho's state of mind now that he is already dead and there is nobody left to challenge your 'opinions'.
Posted by: Bill in New Hampshire | Apr 17, 2007 4:24:36 PM
How is it that he could use an immigration card to buy the guy when he hadn't renewed his green card since 2003? Aren't schools supposed to make their students immigration status current and if they had maybe this could have been prevented in some way?
Posted by: fmcaree | Apr 17, 2007 4:25:36 PM
if he brought one gun then turn around and brought another gun ..i think a red flag should go up and check to see why a young boy was buying two gun... this is a sad world we live in.. i think if anyone thats buys a gun then turn around and buys another one i mean a red flag should go up fast.. don't you have to check their back rounds.. before thay can have a gun.. i hope the whole world is praying for this lost..i know i'm ...
Posted by: cathy | Apr 17, 2007 4:25:38 PM
The parents of this monster should be jailed. Who else can be held responsible for this horrific event? Marilyn Manson, medications, diet, popular culture? No, the job of the parent is to raise an individual ready to make a positive impact in society. Not this depraved, disgusting, devil of an animal that committed these attrocities against helpless and innocent people.
I don't mean to sound perverse but I wish there were a way to revive him so that he could be put to death by the state. I am ashamed that a human being could grow up and act this way.
Posted by: AJ | Apr 17, 2007 4:30:25 PM
That was tragic. May God save those taken souls.
Posted by: travis | Apr 17, 2007 4:32:30 PM
So the guy that sells guns is sad that someone used the gun to kill people! Guns are made to kill people. Every person that buys a gun has the potential and surely anticipates having to kill someone with the gun, if the gun shop owner cannot comprehend this minor detail, he should cease selling guns.
Posted by: john galt | Apr 17, 2007 4:34:11 PM
My prayers are with Cho Seung-Hui's parents and family.
Posted by: Sandy | Apr 17, 2007 4:34:50 PM
Sounds like it was too easy. It's okay to own guns but there should be higher hurdles... 1) Only allow citizens to own guns 2) 6-month waiting period 3) Notification of universities or employers when gun is purchased.
Posted by: XYZ | Apr 17, 2007 4:43:38 PM
How did the owner know he was very cordial and nothing was out of the ordinary if he was not present when he bought the gun?
Posted by: Josh | Apr 17, 2007 4:51:42 PM
hy does the USA allow non-residents to purchase guns? This should be a right for Americans only! There is no reason for a person from another country to be allowed to purchase a gun. This is like giving guns to the 911 hijackers.
Laws should change ASAP!
Posted by: Gary Nowlin | Apr 17, 2007 4:52:24 PM
Blame the gun or blame the individual who consciously manipulates the gun? Liberals blame the gun because it would mean taking no personal responsibility... Conservatives blame the individual who made the conscious decision to commit this violence and hold him accountable for his own actions. Plain enough?
Posted by: Romeo | Apr 17, 2007 5:00:19 PM
This is a diaster. I don't know what could have possessed this man to do this. I think that the state of Virgina needs a new gun law to be put in place immediately.
Posted by: M.Porter | Apr 17, 2007 5:03:51 PM
true brian. The gun grabbers will tell you that the police will take care of you and your safety. Sure worked for those poor dead students!
Posted by: robert | Apr 17, 2007 5:05:32 PM
Isn't it ironic that the people who think tougher gun laws would help reduce gun crime are the same people who think tough drug laws are ineffective.
Posted by: Robin B | Apr 17, 2007 5:05:53 PM
probably would have just beat people to death with the nearest stick or rock then I guess - by your logic.
I'm a liberal. I blame the wacko and the people who allow the wacko to have a gun - equally.
But I also completely agree with Chris Rock when he says we just need to make bullets a whole lot more expensive!
Posted by: jj | Apr 17, 2007 5:07:01 PM
Yeah, all those college students packing heat would sure make those frathouse parties a lot more fun.
Posted by: Dan | Apr 17, 2007 5:07:56 PM
A new gun law? Great idea, blame the gun. As many lives as drinking & driving takes, I don't hear folks like you calling for alcohol to be banned.
Posted by: Chad | Apr 17, 2007 5:08:37 PM
The arguement could go both ways. You take all the handguns from law abiding citizens and only the criminals will have them. You arm every law abiding citizen and an event like Columbine or Virginia Tech begins to unfold and everyone who has a handgun begins shooting. It's be like Dodge City on a Saturday night. There will be more than 32 dead. Try 3 or 4 times what this shooter got away with. There is no middle ground. Either absolutly no one has a gun or absolutly everyone has a gun. It'll be the wild west all over again.
Posted by: David | Apr 17, 2007 5:09:39 PM
Ceteris paribus - the more guns in circulation, the greater the number of people who are going to get shot.
Posted by: JJ | Apr 17, 2007 5:10:21 PM
I don't know of one liberal who thinks this guy is innocent.
Liberals blame people AND guns, conservatives only blame people.
Posted by: Robert | Apr 17, 2007 5:10:23 PM
Yes, let's definitely push for student CHPs. Because college students rarely drink too much and get recklessly violent.
Posted by: Joe | Apr 17, 2007 5:10:32 PM
Yeah, JJ nothing like making a ridiculous argument out of this very serious situation.
Posted by: JJ's Rational Twin | Apr 17, 2007 5:10:42 PM
To all those wanting more gun control. Remember this, VT didn't allow guns on campus or in dorms, so having laws against guns don't do anything beyond making the law biding citizens unarmed targets.
Posted by: Yirmin Snipe | Apr 17, 2007 5:10:56 PM
In response to Romeo, as an independent, I blame liberals and conservatives. Despite ones political affliation, something must be done to protect innocent people and that everyone will agree.
Posted by: Zip | Apr 17, 2007 5:11:10 PM
My bad, Romero is the one bringing politics into this tradegy.
Posted by: John G | Apr 17, 2007 5:11:32 PM
In response to Romeo, as an independent, I blame liberals and conservatives. Despite ones political affliation, something must be done to protect innocent people and that everyone will agree.
Posted by: Zip | Apr 17, 2007 5:11:45 PM
To be able to just prance into a gun shop and walk out with a handgun that is semiautomatic is ludicrous. The Brady Bill was helpful; now it must be renewed. This is not covered by the "right to bear arms." This is not what the founders meant. This is not a hunting rifle. He was not even a citizen of the US. What is he was from Saudi Arabia-would it make a difference? The quickness and ease of the transaction in Virginia makes no sense. Police wanted and want a return of a tougher Brady Bill. The new "Brady-VT Bill."
Posted by: Bill | Apr 17, 2007 5:11:54 PM
My bad, Romero is the one bringing politics into this tradegy.
Posted by: John G | Apr 17, 2007 5:12:12 PM
The gun is merely the tool used. Passing more restrictive gun laws does nothing to address the mental state of Cho. Rather, such laws restrict those who can legally and morally defend themselves. There are causes far graver than guns that lead to Cho's decisions and the violence he perpetrated.
Posted by: Mike | Apr 17, 2007 5:12:52 PM
This really just makes my stomach twist into knots. Letting foreigners, (regardless of their status),buy guns in this country should be outlawed
Posted by: John | Apr 17, 2007 5:13:02 PM
For all of you gun nuts who think if all students were armed this would not have happened.....I guess your goal is to have as many guns per capita as....say....Iraq or Syria??? Maybe then violence would decrease? Haha Look at the stats, countries with the least gun laws have the most gun related deaths, countries with the least gun laws have the most gun related deaths (i.e. USA) Are you people stupid or something?
Posted by: Robert | Apr 17, 2007 5:13:05 PM
Lets promote a "culture of life" by providing everyone with guns!!!
Posted by: Robert | Apr 17, 2007 5:17:10 PM
Pearl, Ms school shooter gave up when confronted by a school employee who had a Colt .45. Otherwise the shooter would have kept killing. Responsibilty lies with the shooter and then the state universities for their efforts to turn the campi into "gun free zones" and fighting the legistation to allow permit holders to carry on campus.
Posted by: e. zach lee | Apr 17, 2007 5:17:46 PM
Lol good one Bruce just blame the Liberals. Don't you know they were the reason the Twin Towers were bombed? Try again Bruce.
Posted by: John G | Apr 17, 2007 5:18:46 PM
Actually Bill, the Brady Bill did
NOT work. And bringing it back won't work either. Ask Australia how well gun control works; violent crime shot up, they've
now banned swords, and people are killing each other with butter knives.
Posted by: Chad | Apr 17, 2007 5:20:30 PM
There is no good reason to label conservatives as pro gun and liberals as anti's. I am quite liberal and very much pro gun. I will pass my love of hunting and fishing to my children and grandchildren. They will also know that the people who commit these crimes are either fueled by massive amounts of anger and/or completely nut.
Posted by: Too Big | Apr 17, 2007 5:20:58 PM
Yeah, let's not blame the gun. It certainly wasn't the gun's fault.
Hmmm... let's say he'd tried this with a knife or a bow and arrow instead of an automatic pistol.
Think he could have killed 31 people in fifteen minutes with a knife?
Nope.
But gun advocates always leap to defend the weapon.
We dropped the bomb on Hiroshima so we could kill a lot of people fast. That's the same reason this jerk bought an automatic pistol. So he could kill a lot of people fast.
Posted by: David Raether | Apr 17, 2007 5:21:23 PM
No gun control law would have stopped this. The individual had no criminal record more significant than a parking ticket, and purchased the gun far in advance of his heinous act. The fact that he was here on a student visa makes no difference. A US citizen is just as likely to commit this kind of crime -- a fact reinforced by the history school shootings in the US. Gun control laws could not have stopped this. The reality of the fact is that if someone wants to murder a massive number of people, there's no way to stop it. Deny the person a gun, and he will simply use a backpack bomb in a crowded mall, or a fertilizer bomb (ala McVeigh) and take out 320 people instead of 32. This is NOT going to be solved with gun control laws. To believe otherwise is delusional.
Posted by: Chris | Apr 17, 2007 5:21:56 PM
Let me guess......if there were more guns this would improve?
Funny how the countries at the bottom of the list have the strictist gun laws.
Country Gun Death Rate per 100,000
Japan 0.07
Singapore 0.24
Taiwan 0.27
Kuwait 0.37
England/ Wales 0.4
Scotland 0.49
Netherlands 0.55
Spain 0.74
Ireland 1.24
Germany 1.44
Italy 2.27
Sweden 2.27
Denmark 2.48
Israel 2.56
New Zealand 2.67
Australia 2.94
Belgium 3.32
Canada 3.95
Norway 4.23
Austria 4.48
Northern Ireland 4.72
France 5.48
Switzerland 6.2
Finland 6.65
USA 13.47
Posted by: Robert | Apr 17, 2007 5:22:36 PM
For all you people pointing fingers at Guns and the associated laws, why don't we look to the root cause...which has something to do with society and what ever cause this guy to loose his mind. As said before, tougher gun laws would only unarm law abiding citizens. If it wasn't a gun, this guy would have found something else to use...makeshift bomb...etc. Lets put aside our political agenda and look to the root cause...it's easy to point to the person or the gun.
Posted by: nate | Apr 17, 2007 5:22:55 PM
It boggles the mind that people can watch this news coverage and suggest that what we needed yesterday was more people with guns in that building. SOME violent acts can be used to make an interesting "more guns, more deterrence" argument, but this is not it. This boy clearly did not care if he died.
Posted by: You | Apr 17, 2007 5:23:46 PM
It's a shame either way...It is the GUNS fault, because a joker bought it....
I say let us all carry guns. Turst me, let some start shooting my way and I would return fire...
What's even worse is the way the school handled this affair...2 hours...I know what school my kids are not goin too...
Posted by: Steve | Apr 17, 2007 5:23:47 PM
Notice how the gun fanatics start attacking the news media every time one of their number goes off and shoots a bunch of innocent people? It wasn't ABC News that killed those kids. It was some maniac who was able to plunk down $71 and get a lethal weapon.
Posted by: Patrick | Apr 17, 2007 5:24:21 PM
Why are we making this a political discussion?
Posted by: Yuri | Apr 17, 2007 5:24:49 PM
Zip - even with the brady bill, this guy would have passed. Did you even read the article? This murderer obviously brushed up on his laws because he timed the purchase of his two firearms to be far enough apart that he wouldn't run afoul of the "one gun a month law." If he had no problem waiting 31 days for his second gun, he clearly would have had no problem waiting for a five day "cooling off" period for the first one.
I'm sorry, but bad things happen, and the rush to create a law that will address that specific instance never works. Without access to guns, someone this cold, this calculating would probably choose something else like several homemade pipe bombs made from $20 worth of material and capable of killing and maiming dozens if tossed into a classroom door on the way by.
For those who say that "these aren't hunting rifles" I have two comments. First, where in the Constitution does it say that the right to bear arms is for hunting or sport only? Guess what, it doesn't, just like the first amendment doesn't say that it applies only to newspapers and written speech - it applies to newer mediums like this website. Second, as a police officer, I can tell you I would much rather face a person with two handguns than a person with a single hunting rifle. With a good hunting round, you could line people up four deep and punch a hole through all of them at a hundred yards out, whereas handgun ammunition usually wouldn't make it out of the first body. The bullet-resistant vests we wear are good for handgun ammo, but are clearly stamped that they are not effective against ANY type of rifle fire.
Posted by: Flipper | Apr 17, 2007 5:25:13 PM
He was apparently law-abiding.
He had a valid Green card. He waited for thirty (30) days before purchasing his second hand gun.
He had a clean record with the law and as far as anyone now knows he had not been committed for psychiatric care, at least in any way that would become public knowledge.
This country differs in the way that it looks upon gun purchases and ownership from other countries. Canada and the United Kingdom come to mind.
I fired every infantry weapon in the inventory of the United States. Thank God I never had to do so in combat. I enjoyed firng them all at the time, a rifle, pistol, etc. I was only a kid.
By the time I got my discharge I was delighted never to own or handle a gun again.
I can't imagine having a gun in my home.
Posted by: D. Martin | Apr 17, 2007 5:26:08 PM
Does it really matter liberal or conservative? You can't argue that the Commonwealth of Virginia is in dire need of tougher gun control or else this wouldn't have happened. What you also can't do is blame the gun. Our Constitution guarantees us the right to bear arms. It does not however, say anything about the person who posesses the gun. Clearly, the perpatrator of this horrible crime had a more than his share of pent up angst and aggression. It's not a question of placing blame in this instance, it's irrelevant. The question is what can be done to prevent something like this from ever happening in the future? All too often we hear about how people didn't act on a hunch or an intuition they had about something being wrong with somebody because they don't want to embarrass them.
We frequently hear about police officers and other public servants not wanting to call the intervention teams of their resepective agencies because of the negative consequences it can have on their colleagues career. This is of no comfort to the 32 sets of parents who now have to bury their teenage or barely 20 year old children. If you think somebody might be headed down the same path, I implore pick up the phone. I can think of a few sets of parents who will thank you.
Posted by: Josh | Apr 17, 2007 5:26:41 PM
isn't it crazy how ppl toss aside 32 innocent lives to discuss how every student should or shouldn't have a gun? as if 28,000 students with weapons or without weapons matters.. maybe he would have been stopped after killing only 2 ppl, or 10 ppl before another model citizen would have put him down???? is this really relevant to the ppl and their families. Either way these kids will be used for political reasons by ignorant citizens and politicians alike. Obviously most ppl have no care for these individuals but only their personal feelings. whether folks should own guns or not own guns - not relevant.. what is obvious though is this kid being able to buy 2 guns was not in the best interest of anyone. and 32 kids and their families don't care what the constitution says, only that they're kin were slain for no reason and every jackazz in America who has no brain will use this to argue one way or the other with no regard for the memory of these ppl.
Posted by: steve | Apr 17, 2007 5:28:26 PM
Times have changed. People do not fight with fists and then let it be. Guns in the hands of people who are scared of a little ass whooping is dangerous. Murder is seen as an option for humiliation today. It is not the laws that dictate this it is the culture we live in where any disrespect is a grave offence. People take themselves to seriously, remember tomorrow is another day. People on this blog attacking one another is exactly what Im taling about.
Posted by: Pat Buchanan | Apr 17, 2007 5:29:17 PM
Liberals and Conservatives both have it wrong about the gun or the individual being responsible. Firearms sales in the U.S. are a two billion dollar annual market. And more than 200 million of them are floating around on the streets or in legal possession. Relative to this statistic, the **level** of chronic gun crime in America is proportionate to a business decision.
Posted by: icepick4bambi | Apr 17, 2007 5:29:26 PM
can someone that own a glock , explain to me, how is it possible to kill 32 person and injury about the same number with only 50 bullets? is it an error of the press or is it possible?
i have read that the killer is not a professional shooter.
Are those special bullets that can hit more than one body?
i need a technical explanation, i don't want begin a flame post, just know if the press is wrong.
Posted by: seba | Apr 17, 2007 5:29:59 PM
Hey Chris,
You seem like a stats kind of guy. How about you look up deaths due to Samurai swords. I would imagine that list would be up-side-down.
Posted by: nate | Apr 17, 2007 5:30:26 PM
If it were common for everyone (i.e. the students in the class) to have a gun this event would not have happened, pure and simple. He would have been taken out very soon and fewer people would have died if any. That is just basic sense in this case.
However I do think that if everyone in society were suddenly packing a gun there would be more murders in general. It is all speculation on my part but I just think of all of the punches that are thrown in anger that I have seen in my life. It would seem that these could no doubt escalate to gun fights pretty quickly.
Although... if someone is thought to be packing a gun that first punch probably would not be thrown... it just may make everyone a little more civil and polite. Hmmm... OK I think it may just boil down to a more civil society in the end.
Posted by: Pocket Nukes 4All | Apr 17, 2007 5:31:32 PM
32% of gun owners involved in a gun related incident are killed by their own gun....I think Darwin called it "natural selection" haha
Posted by: Robert | Apr 17, 2007 5:31:41 PM
icepick4bambi - that was just the single purchase at that one store. he may have bought more elsewhere or on a seperate visit. odds are he went to the range to practice. If not... woah.
Posted by: Pocket Nukes 4All | Apr 17, 2007 5:34:26 PM
The Root cause is that we allow these Asian miscreants into our USA. They are nothing but dung as are the African so called Americans. We have a disease.......aliens whether legal or not.

Stray Guns in Baghdad
For McCain, Another Problem Fundraiser