"A Tragedy... of Monumental Proportions."

There will be plenty of "rapid responses" to the gun rampage on the Virginia Tech campus, which has claimed the lives of as many as 31 students -- making it the deadliest school shotting incident in the history of the United States.

Do not doubt that the National Rifle Association is preparing its "this-had-nothing-to-do-with-guns" press release. The group has no compunctions about living up to its reputation for being beyond shame -- or education -- when it comes to peddling its spin on days when it would be better to simply remain silent. But the NRA will not be alone in responding in a self-serving manner. Many groups on all sides of issues related to guns and violence in America will be busy making their points, just as many in the media will look for one dimensional "explanations" for what the university's president, Charles Steger, has correctly described as "a tragedy... of monumental proportions."

"The university is shocked and indeed horrified," explained Steger, after it became clear that what had happened on his campus Monday was worse than the carnage at Columbine High School in 1999 or at the University of Texas in 1966.

The trouble with shock and horror is that it does not often translate into contemplation, let alone serious reflection on the state of a nation in which such an incident can occur -- and, more troublingly, in which no one can suggest that the killings were unimaginable.

The first question, appropriately, is: Why did this happen?

The second question, equally appropriately, is: What should we do about it?

There is is a simple answer to Question No. 1: America is a violent country.

Unfortunately, simple answers lead to simplistic responses. If America can do nothing about its violent streak, the NRA will argue, it is silly to place limits on gun ownership. Better to arm everyone, the argument goes. Or better to allow the "concealed carry" of weapons. Or, well, you get the point -- anything to avoid taking a piece out of the profits of the corporations that manufacture and sell deadly weapons.

By the same token, the notion that banning those weapons will end the violence has become a a tougher sell. Shocking and horrible rampages occur in countries with stricter gun laws than the U.S. No, they do not happen as frequently. But they do happen.

Conversely, in some countries where gun ownership is relatively high, incidents like at Virginia Tech are far less common.

We ought to wrestle with these contradictions and complexities.

But where to begin?

Here is a modest proposal: Instead of adopting a particular line, rent Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine."

Of course, there are those who will not be able to see beyond their rage at Moore to recognize the value of this particular film.

Moore's 2002 film remains the best popular exploration of violence and the gun culture in America. And, despite what the film maker's critics would have you believe, it is a remarkably nuanced assessment of the zeitgeist.

Moore's purpose was to offer an explanation for why the Columbine massacre occurred and to examine the broader question of why the U.S. has higher rates of violent crimes than other developed nations.

Moore certainly does not let apologists for the gun industry off the hook. But he does not stop there. "Bowling for Columbine" explores the role that America's mad foreign policies and obscene expenditures on weapons of mass destruction might play in fostering a culture of violence. Most significantly, Moore takes a serious look at the way in which American media, with its obsessive crime coverage, creates a climate of fear in this country -- a climate that actually ends up encouraging violence.

After the movie came out, Mary Corliss wrote in Film Comment: "Moore makes the mind swim with the atrocities and poignancies on display. 'Bowling for Columbine' should be mandatory viewing."

That was true in 2002. It is ever more true today.

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

John Nichols' new book is THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson hails it as a "nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic [that] combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the 'heroic medicine' that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to 'reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.'"

Comments (108)

1. Secondest Biggest Political Mistake....the "culture warriors" on the Right seizing on this event to try to go after "video games", etc.

   and the winner...

   Democrats/liberals/"progressives" seizing on it to try to push almost ANY agenda. Politically it's got disaster spelled all over it.

   The "Three Gs" (God, guns, gays) has been steadily avoided or obfuscated by Democrats for years...and they know why. It kills them in the polls...and not JUST in the "Red States".

   And if it looks like "trying to politicize a tragedy"...the politics get worse.

   And if we go into "linkages" to "American militarism" or "macho attitudes" or "patriarchy" or the whole gamut of Hard Left coffee-house discussion topics....it'll get worse yet.

   Posted by Mask at 04/16/2007 @ 4:45pm

2. Part of the cause couldn't possibly be all of those shoot 'em up action hero movies hollywood churns out every year, could it? Or maybe some of those gangsta rap songs all the kids listen to?

   Nah, the real danger is all of those rednecks with the deer rifles on the back windows of their pickup trucks, and since they say that the shooter was asian, he probably was a victim of racism.......

   Posted by davebarlett at 04/16/2007 @ 4:50pm

3. Masky, you beat me in the "rapid response" race!

   Posted by davebarlett at 04/16/2007 @ 4:51pm

4. The sad thing, of course, is that nothing will change. There will be other massacres like this one. The casualty rate will probably not be as high next time, but others are certain to die in the not too distant future in similar shooting rampages. It's a cultural problem, which is why it's futile to politicize it.

   Posted by Amsterdam69 at 04/16/2007 @ 5:18pm

5. Why cite Moore, he hates this country- do you hate America too -the French don't even like him. With polarizing folks such as you, many folks feel safer armed! Your attitude breeds contempt for the other half that thinks differently than you- that's about 150 million folks.

   Posted by robster at 04/16/2007 @ 5:21pm

6. Posted by ROBSTER 04/16/2007 @ 5:21pm

   Have you even seen the movie?

   Posted by BlueTexan at 04/16/2007 @ 5:24pm

7. Dave:

   Talk about rednecks with deer rifles! A lot of those gun-toting types happen to be black or Asian or female. Looks like you'll have to reevaluate your prejudices and get a better handle on your target group. Hell, you might hate everybody who's different than you! Hmmm, you might be more American than you think!

   Posted by robster at 04/16/2007 @ 5:32pm

8. Why cite Moore, he hates this country- do you hate America too -the French don't even like him. With polarizing folks such as you, many folks feel safer armed! Your attitude breeds contempt for the other half that thinks differently than you- that's about 150 million folks.

   Posted by ROBSTER 04/16/2007 @ 5:21pm

   Michael Moore does not hate America, he just hates your version of it - the kind of country where people feel the need to arm themselves whenever they read words they don't like. It's pretty rich to accuse someone who writes for a fringe magazine of polarizing and breeding contempt, with a president in the White House who is directly responsible for what is just about the worst polarization American society has experienced since the Civil War.

   I agree with Nichols: watch Bowling for Columbine, even if you didn't like Fahrenheit 9/11 - which I didn't.

   Posted by Amsterdam69 at 04/16/2007 @ 5:36pm

9. I don't want to caste any aspersions, but bomb threats the week before, a shooting incident two hours before the massacre...what is going on with security on campus? Aren't bomb threats also of concern to FBI and Homeland Security? I notice that WH spokesperson was quick to add that FBI will be glad to help out "if State law enforcement asks for it." Maybe as this story develops, there will be more answers.

   I agree with the posters that indicate that "guns" are not per se at fault here. I believe in the right to bear arms, but would also agree that assault weapons should be heavily regulated. This isn't going to prevent criminal by trade types from getting them on the black market, but maybe it will stop a few "wackos" from so easily getting them and going on a shooting spree.

   This tragedy reminds me that we should spending our tax money on domestic security measures rather than pissing it away in the Middle East. For the money we are spending in Iraq, our domestic security could be vastly increased. We are a sitting duck for terrorists and it is miraculous that with all the enemies that we are making in the Middle East that they haven't hit us yet again.

   I don't remember this kind of wanton and indiscriminate violence occurring when I was growing up, and automatic weapons were available back then. What influence does all the gratuitous violence on television, movies, video-games, etc., have on our psyche? It is just so easy to pull the trigger. Maybe we need to regulate the amount of violence for pleasure we are exposed to? I have no doubt that this is adding to violence in America.

   This is unbelievable. Condolences and prayers to all.

   Posted by OneVote at 04/16/2007 @ 5:36pm

10. jesus "robster" are you really so stupid that you cannot even recognize bartlett's clumsy, blatant sarcasm? Crawl back under the rock from whence your dumb ass came.

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 5:36pm

11. Are firearms too readily available here? Yes.

    Are we a culture drenched in violence? Yes. (Sex is verboten, but violence is ok with many a con and librool alike)

    The responsible party is the one what pulled the trigger. Was he sane? We may never know. But he was responsible. The only real shocker is that this does not happen more often, like it does in say, Iraq.

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/16/2007 @ 5:38pm

12. I am usually pretty far to the left on issues, but i personally feel that gun control is as useless as drug control- there is such a huge black market for both that the criminal element will always have access withing prohibitory measures congruent with a free society. I wholeheartedly agree that the underlying problem is our violent culture, but concur with mask's assesment that politicizing this incident would not only be crass, but also wholly moronic.

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 5:40pm

13. "A lot of those gun-toting types happen to be black or Asian or female."

    Posted by ROBSTER 04/16/2007 @ 5:32pm

    Well, ROBSTER, I'm Black and female. Does that make me a killer?

    Posted by ACook at 04/16/2007 @ 5:43pm

14. "Was he sane? We may never know" Crab

    I would contend that no one capable of perpetrating a tragedy of this magnitude could be considered sane. In that two hours passed between incidents it would, however, seem that he did possess some degree of rationality.

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 5:44pm

15. Amendment II

    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    right there in the Owners Manual, REGULATION.

    Would it prevent this type of horror? Impossible to say.

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/16/2007 @ 5:46pm

16. "I don't remember this kind of wanton and indiscriminate violence occurring when I was growing up, and automatic weapons were available back then. What influence does all the gratuitous violence on television, movies, video-games, etc., have on our psyche? It is just so easy to pull the trigger. Maybe we need to regulate the amount of violence for pleasure we are exposed to? I have no doubt that this is adding to violence in America."

    "This is unbelievable. Condolences and prayers to all."

    Posted by ONEVOTE 04/16/2007 @ 5:36pm

    That's because the "real" news organizations didn't put it out there to create mass panic as they do now.

    And, as far as regulating the "violence for pleasure" entertainment, a simple solution comes to mind. It's called being an involved parent.

    Posted by ACook at 04/16/2007 @ 5:54pm

17. -the French don't even like him

    right, that's why they gave him the palmes d'or

    and agreed with most that this issue is a complex one, and nobody should throw out simplistic 'one-dimensional' explanations (which nichols certainly has done).

    Posted by darladoon at 04/16/2007 @ 5:54pm

18. he probably was a victim of racism.......

    Posted by DAVEBARLETT 04/16/2007 @ 4:50pm

    Maybe he was told there were WMD's in the a building down the block, so he went in a-gunnin' at the wrong place.

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/16/2007 @ 5:55pm

19. "That's because the "real" news organizations didn't put it out there to create mass panic as they do now."

    BS.They didn't have instant communication across the country like we do now, 24hr instant coverage.

    If it bleeds, it leads" is as old as you, if not older.

    ---Marshall reported that the Oregonians "found our friendly Indians; induced a part to come, telling them I wanted to talk to them; brought them to Coloma; picked out eight which were most friendly to me, and dismissed the others; drank plenty of whiskey; took out the eight Indians ... bid them run, commenced shooting, killed seven of the eight prisoners.

    "Some escaped and returned to their old home on what is now called Humboldt Bay but then tragedy struck February 26, 1860. As they were having a festival on what is now called Gunther Island, just north of Eureka, a crowd of six or eight white men took a canoe and slipped over there in the night with axes, clubs and knives and murdered innocent men, women and children," wrote Weitch-ah-wah."

    In the northwest the Modoc were tricked into a cold blooded ambush after accepting an invitation to a peace-making feast. Ben Wright, an infamous hunter of Native communities, invited them to a truce at Tule Lake in 1852 and tried to feed them strychnine-laced food. When they grew suspicious and refused to eat, he and his men whipped out pistols and massacred 41 out of the 46 that attended. Later Wright was murdered at the order of a female interpreter whom he humiliated who then personally ate his heart."

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/16/2007 @ 5:59pm

20. I feel the same way hearing about this story as I did about the Imus story. This country's going down the toilet-- it's like everyone feels comfortable acting straight from the id with no respect or concern or compassion for anyone else. Neither the left or the right can claim any moral high ground. Rampant suicide is a disturbing enough trend that our society is sick. The grandiose insensitivity required to make the decision to kill scores of innocent people, ruining the lives of their families and creating a ripple effect of tragedy in an entire community before inevitably killing oneself, is a trend that can't be explained away by guns, video games or any of the usual bugaboos.

    Posted by habiba at 04/16/2007 @ 6:02pm

21. Interesting how even though the majority of voters favor common-sense regulations like the Brady Law, and even though the majority elected Democrats to make our laws, Republicans helpfully warn the Democrats to avoid 'politicizing' an incident that demonstrates once again the need for stricter regulations, on the grounds that pushing for stricter gun control would provoke a backlash from the same lunatic fringe that wants to turn our democracy into a theocracy. God, guns, and gays indeed.

    Posted by samcrossett at 04/16/2007 @ 6:05pm

22. You know, I'm a subscriber to the print version of The Nation, I am an open critic of George Bush, American cultural excesses and so on.

    I am also a gun owner. I have always believed and continue to believe that liberals are simply dangerously wrong on the issue of gun control.

    But putting that aside for a moment, I will say that one of the things the Left can do if it truly wants to make an impact is enlist the NRA and organizations like it as allies in the fight against the kind of insanity we saw today at Virginia Tech.

    Believe it or not, NRA members are as horrified by this as anyone else, but are forced on the defensive because every time some moron goes on a shooting spree, many people suddenly look to blame responsible, decent gun owners. This seriously divides and dilutes any kind of coordinated effort to prevent these kinds of incidents in the future.

    Like most other gun owners, there is nothing anyone can do to - no law, no enforcement effort - nothing - to get me to give up my gun.

    I would go so far as to urge that the moral and proper thing to do is for peaceable citizens to defy and ignore any gun law or registration scheme. It is far too late in the history of the United States to attempt to make this a gun free country for the same reasons it is too late to make it drug or alcohol free.

    Unlike drugs, guns do not have a shelf life. They can last hundreds of years. There are literally hundreds of millions of guns in circulation in America, most completely unaccounted for.

    And thank God for that. Many people on the Left rightly oppose the Drug War and point to its ineffectiveness, yet many of the same people can, in the same breath, urge a War on Guns, doomed to failure for precisely the same reasons. Many on the Left like to pick or choose bits and pieces out of the Bill of Rights to stand for. Not even the First Amendment references "the right of the people" - but the Second does. I'm sorry that many feel that the Constitution is inconvenient. I'm used to cringing when the Right tries to defang the First Amendment, but I'm doubly depressed when the Left attempts (mostly unsuccessfully so far, thank God) to do this to the Second.

    Until the Left stops dishonestly stereotyping all gun owners (and they do, horribly - in much the same way that Fox News and their weirdo audience stereotypes "them goldurn libruls"), all of the energy that could be spent formulating a reasonable and effective united strategy to prevent these incidents in the future, will instead be sucked into the gun control/gun rights debate. I agree with the article that the gun rights crowd sometimes oversimplifies this ("Arm everyone!") but I am also saddened by the unconsidered dismissal of the idea that maybe having some of the right people armed could mitigate the havoc wreaked by the kind of losers who shoot up schools. You can deal with the situation as it is, or deal with it as you'd like it to be.

    I understand that people are sick of violence, gun accidents, and America's absurd cultural excesses. I am, too (and I'm not just saying that - I really am).

    But it is not, by and large, your typical God-fearin' right wing NRA gun owner who is responsible for these tragedies. NRA members do not (for example), by and large, buy or enjoy, violent and sexist rap CDs. Gun owners tend to be extremely aware of the danger of firearms in the wrong hands. Which is largely why so many of us own guns to begin with. Go into the backcountry in any rural US state where people are shooting recreationally. You will be surprised by how friendly, cautious, and responsible the vast majority of gun owners are. Or go down to a range and observe what happens when someone does something even slighly unsafe, like failing to keep even an unloaded gun pointed downrange. NRA-type gun owners tend to be obsessive about safety and responsibility.

    The cultural subcurrents that are ripping the US apart at the seams are something else entirely. I'm sick of being lumped in murderers, myself. My gun has murdered a few hundred soda cans. That's about it.

    If people are really interested in ending this unfortunate trend, rather than simply engaging in masturbatory and sanctimonious condemnations of gun owners, enlist responsible gun owners, instead, in the fight. Even the most brazen Bush and war fans are sick of, and horrified by, these incidents. They have children, too.

    But don't turn around and use the same arguments and tactics you would insist were invalid in discussing alcohol or drug or sexual prohibitions (or prohibitions on abortion), and use them against guns. It both undermines your credibility, and betrays the emotionalism and irrationality of your intent. You don't like guns. We get it. We support your right not to own a gun or have one on your premises. No problem.

    I actually like liberals (people often call me one). Most of my friends are liberals; some are libertarians. But those on the Left who support gun control are dangerously and alarmingly wrong. And the amount of ignorance I have heard come from the mouths of well educated people on the subject of firearms, is disturbing. I know that it alienates me (both as a voter and in terms of engaging in constructive political activity). It also alienates millions of other Americans who might vote for a Democrat, but for the fact that many (or most) in the Democratic Party have a reputation for wanting to take firearms, a means of self defense, from law abiding citizens. And such a political viewpoint ought to be feared for the authoritarianism that it is.

    For the same reason that people who would gut the first and fourth Amendment in the name of the drug war ought to be feared.

    For the same reason the pro-life movement ought to be feared.

    For the same reason those who would make certain sexual activities between consenting adults a crime ought to be feared.

    For the same reason those who support the draft ought to be feared.

    For the same reason those who would gut the First Amendment on the grounds of obscenity ought to be feared.

    It is all part of the same impulse; and all of these people believe that they are well-intentioned.

    Posted by quag7 at 04/16/2007 @ 6:07pm

23. And, as far as regulating the "violence for pleasure" entertainment, a simple solution comes to mind. It's called being an involved parent.

    Posted by ACOOK 04/16/2007 @ 5:54pm | ignore this person

    No doubt ACOOK. Parental guidance is equally if not more important in helping to guide morality and distinguishing between what is real and what is not. On the other hand, I fear that many parents have already been exposed to the extent that they can not distinguish between the two.

    Posted by OneVote at 04/16/2007 @ 6:08pm

24. a similar event happened at the university of iowa back in 1992, remember?

    Posted by darladoon at 04/16/2007 @ 6:14pm

25. The grandiose insensitivity required to make the decision to kill scores of innocent people, ruining the lives of their families and creating a ripple effect of tragedy in an entire community before inevitably killing oneself, is a trend that can't be explained away by guns, video games or any of the usual bugaboos.

    Posted by HABIBA 04/16/2007 @ 6:02pm | ignore this person

    Curious as to your take on what may be the cause of this trend? You have stated effect, but no cause. Isn't insensivity a learned behavior to environmental stimulus?

    Posted by OneVote at 04/16/2007 @ 6:16pm

26. I would add that a viewing of "This Film is Not Yet Rated" is also useful, as it examines the willingness of the seven large film distributors (aka the MPAA) to allow excessive violence to be seen by minors even as it prudishly censors sexual content--precisely the opposite of cinematic guidelines in Europe.

    Posted by aedelbert at 04/16/2007 @ 6:21pm

27. SAMCROSSETT:

    "Interesting how even though the majority of voters favor common-sense regulations like the Brady Law, and even though the majority elected Democrats to make our laws, Republicans helpfully warn the Democrats to avoid 'politicizing' an incident that demonstrates once again the need for stricter regulations, on the grounds that pushing for stricter gun control would provoke a backlash from the same lunatic fringe that wants to turn our democracy into a theocracy. God, guns, and gays indeed."

    And this is what I'm talking about. You stereotype as well as your right wing counterparts, so congratulations on that.

    As a secular humanist, supporter of gay marriage, and an enthusiastic supporter of the Second Amendment (and opponent of the Brady Bill), once again I'd like to congratulate you on your hypocrisy.

    It demonstrates, if nothing else, the willful ignorance so many people have to understand opposing viewpoints. Far easier to demonize and stereotype your opponents than confront them rationally.

    Posted by quag7 at 04/16/2007 @ 6:21pm

28. Believe it or not, NRA members are as horrified by this as anyone else, but are forced on the defensive because every time some moron goes on a shooting spree, many people suddenly look to blame responsible, decent gun owners. This seriously divides and dilutes any kind of coordinated effort to prevent these kinds of incidents in the future.

    Posted by QUAG7 04/16/2007 @ 6:07pm | ignore this person

    NRA members do many good things such as teaching kids about gun safety and watching over our constitutional rights. It is totally wrong to make this a political issue. You have alot of support out there from both the right and the left.

    I am certainly not ready to relinguish my right to bear arms, especially to the politicians. It is the last vanguard of our freedom which are forefathers fought to give to us.

    Posted by OneVote at 04/16/2007 @ 6:24pm

29. right there in the Owners Manual, REGULATION.

    In this case, Regulation made things worse. House Bill 1572 was struck down, which basically led to guns being confiscated on campus from law-abiding permit holders, even though concealed carry is legal in the State of Virginia.

    Posted by Sliver at 04/16/2007 @ 6:24pm

30. Trying to identify the contributing factors to these mass shooting should not be the point because the violent nature of our culture is manifested in dozens of ways - that our culture is violent is self evident and there's no near-term solution. This brings me to the issue of gun availability. True, if guns are restricted, registered, even banned, people are still going to acquire guns and shoot one another. Guns are for shooting, among other things, people, and if guns are manufactured people are going to get shot. There's only one logical conclusion to make here - if there are fewer guns and guns are more difficult to obtain then fewer people will get shot. To argue that restricting access to guns will only allow criminals to assail law abiding citizens is illogical - most of these sorts of crimes are committed with lawfully acquired guns. I've lived in so called 'third world' or 'backward' places where nobody except the military and police are allowed to posses guns (Tanzania for one, for three years) and guess what - I never heard or read about anyone getting shot. I have to worry about the grades I give because my students might shoot me?....no - I have to worry about my college students shooting me and anyone else because it's really easy to buy guns. "Guns don't kill people - people kill people."......well....., not if they don't have as many guns! Unfortunately, in our society mass murders are allowable collateral damage that others may have the freedom to profit from our violent culture (and pretend to defend oneself - when all anyone who owns a gun really wants to do is shoot something).

    Posted by ronward at 04/16/2007 @ 6:27pm

31. The question we ought to be asking is not why violent TV, movies, or video games are so prevalent in our culture, but why so many people are aping them like glassy-eyed zombies.

    It's not a question of advertisers, but why people are so incredibly suggestible.

    Why can't people think for themselves? When and why did people become so programmable? A fully-formed human ought to be able to tread through a vast bog of pornography and violent entertainment, and come out the side as a decent individual. It's not some kind of excruciating struggle to resist the influence of media and culture. It simply requires basic mental habits; the ability to automatically deconstruct what we see and hear.

    Why do we not watch commercials and immediately identify their angle, thereby rendering it impotent to influence our decisions? Why do we not watch violent movies and understand this for the fantasy that it is? How can we stand by and let this miserable war continue and not think about the moms and dads, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, who are going to be senselessly snuffed by arrogant, corrosive foreign policy and political ideology?

    Where did we, as individuals, lose the ability to think critically? When did we lose the perspective of what America is - a diverse nation of people with widely differing beliefs and practices, and that tolerance of these differences must be the bedrock of that which sustains us?

    We are jilted by lovers, scorned by classmates, treated less than human by our employers, screwed and alienated by our government, and yet, we're supposed to *endure*. We're supposed to get up and brush ourselves off when we get knocked down. We're supposed to learn how to be good neighbors to those whose private practices we find objectionable or repugnant. This is what it means to be a decent human being.

    Until we stop blaming advertising for obesity, films and video games for violence, and a porn-drenched internet for sexual predation, we're not going to get anywhere.

    Individuals have to be held responsible for being a bunch of walking zombies who cannot distinguish between good and evil, reality and fiction.

    We are responsible for what we do. We are responsible for thinking about right and wrong. Any attempt to regulate the "supply side" of filth and degeneracy must fail in any free society.

    We should ask why there is a demand for such insipid entertainment, and we have to ask why so many people are morally and ethically vapid, and why they have never learned to connect actions with consequences.

    We need to demand that people think critically and act rationally, rather than be like snakes charmed by the reportedly hypnotic piping of Fox News and Grand Theft Auto.

    Posted by quag7 at 04/16/2007 @ 6:36pm

32. Posted by ONEVOTE 04/16/2007 @ 6:16pm

    Well, Onevote, I'm no sociologist-- my two cent theory would be that 1) we're overstimulated, not just by violence per se in movies and music but also by constant entertainment, noise, information, emotional manipulation, etc. Even our food has to be extreme these days to make it appetizing enough to merit our attention.

    2) We're accustomed to having everything instantly and automatically. Unfortunately this includes rapid fire communication-- how can understanding be gained through a sound-bite?-- and automated weapons where you can kill dozens as long as you have a credit card and a functioning trigger finger. Feel depressed? Go on a shopping spree. Feel enraged? Go on a killing spree.

    3) Constant emphasis on the supremacy of the individual, to the exclusion of any sense of responsibility for your community or environment, and to the extent that there's no sense of connection to others, and certainly no empathy for others. Individualism is great, and it's what makes America special, but advertising has gorged this healthy sense of self on messages that help sell products, and it doesn't help when our government encourages and even glorifies selfishness and splendid isolation from ghettos, toxic waste dumps and all other unpleasantness.

    I'm sure as the story develops people will have a lot to say about the underlying causes of this rampage. Ironically I just finished a book today examining the Columbine shootings which drew the conclusion that a culture of bullying was to blame.

    Posted by habiba at 04/16/2007 @ 6:37pm

33. most of these sorts of crimes are committed with lawfully acquired guns.

    Take a look at Canada. Citizens there have "lawfully" acquired guns, and yet they don't have the murder rate that the US has. You need to focus on the "culture" not the guns. If you are implying that most murders in this country are committed by those who lawfully purchased their gun at the local sporting goods store, I would sure love to see those statistics.

    Posted by OneVote at 04/16/2007 @ 6:39pm

34. The question we ought to be asking is not why violent TV, movies, or video games are so prevalent in our culture, but why so many people are aping them like glassy-eyed zombies.

    It's not a question of advertisers, but why people are so incredibly suggestible.

    Good point, Q7! Good night everyone.

    Posted by habiba at 04/16/2007 @ 6:39pm

35. "most of these sorts of crimes are committed with lawfully acquired guns" Ronward

    That is likely to be because it is easy to lawfully aquire guns- if that became difficult then this would be reversed to the majority of these crimes being comitted with illegally aquired guns, but i surmise that the relative level of gun violence would remain constant. This is a societal problem, and it cannot be solved simply by banning the instrument of mayhem. As I and others on this thread have pointed out, one needs only to look at the smashing success of drug prohibition.

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 6:45pm

36. I'm sure as the story develops people will have a lot to say about the underlying causes of this rampage. Ironically I just finished a book today examining the Columbine shootings which drew the conclusion that a culture of bullying was to blame.

    Posted by HABIBA 04/16/2007 @ 6:37pm | ignore this person

    No argument Hab. Emotional maturity and discipline is not a trait our corporate culture wants to inculcate in us. If they can make us Pavlov dogs -- impulsive -- not able to focus and to think -- then we are more apt to buy their product and propaganda.

    Beyond violence, we live in a pretty stressful and negative environment, and I think we have experienced a general loss of hope for the future. This is apt to make many more prone to depression and suicidal tendencies, which can culminate in sociopathic behavior.

    Posted by OneVote at 04/16/2007 @ 6:47pm

37. John Nichols makes great points. The biggest no blame. There ought to be a hiatus on that. Give the victims time. Blame can doled out...but it is clear to me that our society is broken....and we are in for more of these if action is not taken...lest we forget the office shooting last week... and near my home town the Amish School.... Perhaps people will have to forfeit rights..yes cameras ...extra locks at doors...even security in dorms..yes even maybe metal detectors... I know you all probably think this is overeacting..but I am sick of the attacks..WE LEARNED NOTHING IN COLUMBINE>>>EXCEPT HOW TO HAVE MORE...

    Posted by Brendan1234 at 04/16/2007 @ 7:16pm

38. Uh, so Mr. Nichols can't even let the dead rest for a day before politicizing this event, but he oh so cleverly ridicules the NRA for doing just that, even though they haven't said anything yet. Ah, yes, blame American foreign policy for this. Wow. That's so deep. Pathetic. Some psychotic goes nuts and Nichols blames American foreign policy, etc.

    Posted by redikop3 at 04/16/2007 @ 7:18pm

39. Entropy, the comparison with drug prohibition is specious for one simple reason:

    Drinking Alcohol is FUN, and people naturally have a strong desire to engage in activities that are fun.

    Killing strangers with military caliber weaponry? That's not fun, that's the special province of trained soldiers and mentally ill civilians.

    It's really pretty damn simple. The minute that guns are not readily available to anyone in the country who can flash a c-note, no questions asked, the level of gun violence will go down. Will truly sick people find other ways to get guns? Possibly.

    But the LEAST we can do is make sure it's not so damn easy for them.

    Posted by maddox at 04/16/2007 @ 7:18pm

40. The first question, appropriately, is: Why did this happen?

    Because there are nuts here, forgien and natural or domestic.

    However, there are less nuts around than there are normal people with guns, and less nuts a than guns....register the nuts, ban the nuts, take the nuts out of circulation , watch the nuts, spy on tthe nuts, reaqd the nuts emails, tap the nuts, and apply all abpove tp crominals and perhaps the immigrants for a while they are here..and not the guns..

    Posted by john maasch at 04/16/2007 @ 7:27pm

41. MADDOX- I have read and enjoyed many of your well reasoned and informed posts in the past, but what the hell does "Drinking Alcohol is Fun" (I wholeheartedly concur BTW) have to do with drug prohibition other than acting as a useful example of failure? Also, even if killing and maiming with guns is the sole province of soldiers and the mentally deranged, there are an awful lot of the latter roaming the good ol USA, and I feel(with constitutional support) that it is my right to defend myself against them with a firearm. I wish that banning guns would end events like this, but I just don't think it will. Sociopaths would just procure a firearm illegally, or failing that, resort to some other weapon.

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 7:33pm

42. got nuts on your mind tonight maasch?

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 7:34pm

43. "tap the nuts" Maasch I wholly support your right to tap dose nutz biatch!

    Posted by entropy at 04/16/2007 @ 7:36pm

44. hsuB America

    http://acirema.stumbleupon.com/about/

    "Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." Baruch Spinoza

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2007 @ 7:38pm

45. It is worth noting that this sort of tragedy - a mass murder/ suicide - happens every few days, somewhere in Iraq. The Virginia Tech massacre has shaken our nation to the core, and the reverberations will be felt for months if not years.

    What must it be like to endure this sort of thing twice a week for five years?

    Posted by waspman at 04/16/2007 @ 7:46pm

46. Stinking Shock and Awe Lies, Don't Need No Stinking Christian BS, Got Fear-- Get a Stinking Gun. Need MOre Stinking Guns Not Less, Stinking Co=wards.

    "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you."

    Our stinking culture. Yeah Baby.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2007 @ 7:49pm

47. WE LEARNED NOTHING IN COLUMBINE>>>EXCEPT HOW TO HAVE MORE...

    Posted by BRENDAN1234 04/16/2007 @ 7:16pm

    The lesson that I learned from Columbine. Pacifists don't deter criminals, they die. Hiding under a desk while some whacko is reloading for the 4th time doesn't make them like you. Tragically, they were all innocent victims, but there wasn't a hero among them.

    Posted by Sliver at 04/16/2007 @ 8:04pm

48. John Nichols asks his first question, "Why did this happen," and he answers by saying "This is a violent country." Wrong. The answer is this: one man, one student, for reasons as yet unknown to us, went on an uncontrollable rampage --like Son of Sam or anyone else who loses his mind and takes out his personal devils on others. It has absolutely nothing to do with a wholesale condemnation of this or any other country. Secondly, ever since someone in Dallas threw eggs at Adlai Stevenson in 1963, not long before Pres. Kennedy was assassinated there, the first round of these kinds of questions emerged: what is wrong with America? What did we all do as a society to contribute to or cause this outrage. The answer then as now is: nothing. It was the simple act of one individual driven by his own uncontrolled impulses to throw an egg at Adlai Stevenson. Neither John Nichols, nor I, nor anybody else had anything to do with that --physically or metaphysically. Finally, Nichols asks, "What can we do about this?" The answer, of course, is nothing, and any attempt to try to do something over which we have no control will lead, as it inevitably does, to worse problems than the ones that some people think are the answers to the problem. There are no answers. That's what crazies do. Things happen in life willy nilly. There is no role for government at any level to do anything about this kind of random incident, horrible though it is, except to capture, try, and execute the perpetrator --not today, not tomorrow, not in 20 years of whining with feeble excuses over his childhood, but in something like 6 months of legitimate due process. Period. End of story.

    J.H. Cohen, J.D., Ph.D. CritComm@aol.com

    Posted by CritComm at 04/16/2007 @ 8:07pm

49. First its greed is good, and then it's hate. Believe one lie might as well go for the lead. Instant gratification is good.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2007 @ 8:15pm

50. Posted by DAVEBARLETT 04/16/2007 @ 4:51pm

    And I also guessed correctly that a right-winger "culture warrior" would be mentioning film or music.

    And we're already seeing (from Ms vanden Heuvel) the AGENDA of more gun control laws (and as I noted there...oddly we had NO calls for "fertilizer bans" or "diesel fuel purchase" regulation after McVeigh and the OK City bombing...did we?)

    As for Moore...all but his cultists have realized the guy is a fraud. It's been shown in "Manufacturing Dissent" that he DID meet with "Roger" Roger Smith...that he took quotes of Bush out of context for "Farenheit"...

    and that he "selectively edited" his "Canadians with unlocked doors" segment for "Bowling".

    Like Sharpton fans who excuse the Tawana Brawley Hoax....Moore'ites excuse Mikey.

    Posted by Mask at 04/16/2007 @ 8:16pm

51. A lot of sensible responses here. But let's not forget the questions about the conduct of the university police and administration. Two people were shot at about 7:15 AM. The police and administration concluded that the gunman "might" have left campus -- meaning that he might not have -- yet did nothing to protect students: no cancellation of classes, no effort to secure buildings, no warnings to students, nothing. More than two hours later, students and professors innocently attending their classes were murdered en masse. They were given no chance to protect themselves. To be sure, the second and more deadly round of shootings might not have been preventable in any case, but that remains to be determined. And it will be, in the TORRENT of litigation that is going to be filed against the university.

    Posted by sgoodman at 04/16/2007 @ 8:17pm

52. Why is it that whenever something like this happens, we all go running searching for "deeper" answers. I can see it now, for the next week the airwaves and print media will be awash with "experts" telling us why this event happened. Just reading this article and the comments on it, everyone is talking about our violent society and guns. Political sides are being taken. The finger of blame is being readied to be pointed at everyone and everything else except for maybe the one place blame should be assigned ... the killer. Perhaps the killer was just a lonely sick person who snapped and directed his sickness at targets picked out in his clouded sick mind. Perhaps he did not watch violence on TV and movies, perhaps he did not know or care about the NRA or anti-gun organizations or perhaps he was a member of these organizations. Maybe Bowling for Columbine was his favorite movie and he saw in it the points that Nichols writes about in the article. And maybe .. just maybe even after hearing, seeing, reading all about the ills of our society and having agreed with all these points ... this man just went off for no reason other than a series of chemical reactions taking place in his head that made him lose that control and judgment that keeps most of us sane. Perhaps the reason for this tragedy is that simple and if we realize that, we can seek out answers to help people with the same potential problems and protect the public from the consequences of those problems. But somehow I doubt that will happen, because we just do not want to accept that the answer for such a terrible event can be that simple. So, I am prepared to be bombarded with "experts" on CNN, Fox, CBS, Oprah, and Dr. Phil, arguments from the Right and the Left and the usual co-opting of the tragedy by politicians of all political stripes. But maybe, just maybe, some of us will see this for what it just may be ... the tragic end of a sick man.

    Posted by RayinLA at 04/16/2007 @ 8:43pm

53. I live 25 minutes from the shootings at Va. Tech. I know families that who have yet to hear from their kids who go to Tech. The bodies have yet to moved out of the classrooms. Do you think we could just wait and not politicize this until the families have had time to bury their dead? Do you think we could all wait, especially the networks, to get the whole story before we assign blame? Sometimes we all need to grieve together and leave politics at the door. I was listening to ABC on radio at 3:15 the commentator opened the report about Tech with the following "in a part of Virginia where Hunting is popular and guns are common a trajedy has taken place" ----Before the bodies were cold ABC was playing politics. I will do everything in my power to get the person who wrote that fired.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 04/16/2007 @ 8:59pm

54. Entropy, I admit, I was being facetious. I meant to say that the comparison (gun control is apparently doomed to fail because prohibition failed) is not a good one. Trying to prevent an activity like drinking, via some government decree, is doomed from the start - because people like to drink, and it's a behavior that's part of practically every human culture on earth. A fair majority of people seem to agree that some degree of alcohol use is acceptable.

    Regulating guns? Well, gun ownership is in a different category from alcohol drinking. I don't think we're born with an intrinsic propensity to want to shoot guns. Some people learn it as a sport, some people develop the skill in order to hunt, some because their jobs in law enforcement or military require it, but most everyone agrees that gun ownership is a responsibility that is not lightly borne. So maybe we can agree that though we're not going to ban ownership altogether, the enforcement of regulations around ownership need to be more strictly enforced.

    Posted by maddox at 04/16/2007 @ 9:16pm

55. Hate and cruelty sells.

    People like to see it happen, just like a car wreck. Want to see a star quality body count in the movies and in games, fantasy. Doing it to others, then fearing someone could do it to you.

    I believe hsuB has already spun it first and furious. "Sad, but gotta have the guns and more-- not enough guns-- more would've prevented it." What's the next right wing new con pearl harbor spin moment. Wait for it. Here it comes.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2007 @ 9:48pm

56. Can one of those "rednecks" comment?

    In England guns were outlawed and only outlaws have guns. Now innocent individuals are being imprisoned and the criminals are able to sue the good guys.

    In Texas I guarantee you that if this happened at say, A&M there would be only two dead - the criminal and his first victim. After that, a law-abiding redneck would have dispatched the criminal to hell with his/her conceled weapon.

    And if John Nichols wants to see a truly violent country he should visit England or Ireland or France or any other leftie country which outlaws guns. There is true violence there.

    Posted by cthicks52 at 04/16/2007 @ 10:03pm

57. This issue is very complex, and I think that was the main point of this article. I can't stand when people point to video games or movies. Do you think the US is the only country with violent video games and movies? I lived in Taiwan for a year...every teenage boy plays violent video games. And they NEVER have massacres like this. Also, every violent movie made in Hollywood is seen around the world. So, video games and movies are not the cause.

    Guns are also not the cause. As Bowling for Columbine points out Canada is a gun owning country, and they don't have regular school shootings like we do.

    I don't claim to know the answer...but it's not a simple one. The reality is there is something very violent about our society. We all need to reflect on what is so wrong with our society that we regularly produce people who go on these rampages.

    Posted by wangjexi at 04/16/2007 @ 11:08pm

58. a truly violent country he should visit England or Ireland or France or any other leftie country which outlaws guns. There is true violence there.

    Posted by CTHICKS52 04/16/2007 @ 10:03pm | ignore this person

    It sad that violence like this bring out the blood and guts nutjobs that talk out of their asses.

    World Homicide Rates per 100,000 population.

    50.14 South Africa

    21.40 Russia (1999)

    10.00 Lithuania

    _9.94 Estonia

    _6.22 Latvia

    _5.64 U.S.A.

    _2.94 Spain

    _2.86 Finland

    _1.79 France

    _1.76 Canada

    _1.61 England & Wales

    _1.54 Belgium

    _1.50 Greece

    _1.48 Ireland (Eire)

    "Murder is not the crime of criminals, but that of law-abiding citizens."

    Emmanuel Teney

    Posted by COProgressive at 04/16/2007 @ 11:14pm

59. I know this perp killed himself, and this is a different, but maybe we should try this type of punnishment..

    May be we could hand out sentences with a proviso that if you have a gun on your possesion during a crime commision you get an auto 5 years at hard labor...hard labor, maybe a jail with no roof instead of an increase in life style for going to jail...if a weapon is used 10 years and if you fire it in an act of commiting a crime...life...you are gone..and no hope...these young guys commiting crimes and shooting each other in the streets and because they are juveniles and get off light is crazy...if you kill with a gun then a 30 day trail and you join your vitims ...6 feet under and quickly.

    Jail should be a place where you never want to return and should be the most uncomfortable place on earth if you use a gun...and ignore all the crap about how the rest of us should understand your poverty or up bringing....

    Posted by john maasch at 04/16/2007 @ 11:18pm

60. This event will make 4/16/2007 one of the worst days in US history. A young man shot at students at Virginia Tech, killing 32 before turning the gun on himself. As I am writing this we still don't know some of the information. The media does not know who he was or why he did this horrendous thing. People are trying to point a finger at every direction, but why do we have to blame somebody? Why do we have to blame anyone? Cant we just try and understand this situation for what it is. Tragedy, does there have to be a reason why this happen? This situation grounds the American public at a time when most researchers would say that we were desensitized to things like this. A time when we here reports of the rising death tolls in Iraq, 6 years after the US witnessed the first attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor. How can any human be desensitized to this. One thing we may be is scared. Terrified of what happened in our own country, the tragedy is things like this happen all over the world everyday. But not in America, not the City on the Hill. This cant happen in America, not in a small town like Blacksburg, VA. One of the news stories I read was by Neal Boortz, his story focused on how Virginia failed to Act on House bill 1572, which allowed college students and employees to carry handguns to school with proper permits. Boortz believes this may have stopped the shooter before he got to far out of hand. Boortz seems to focused, like the shooter on numbers. The amount of lives lost is important but we cant focus on 1 life against 32 and right now is not a time to be blaming people. People like Neal Boortz needs to respect the dead and their mourners. I usually agree with Boortz's political views, but journalist who point fingers and jump to conclusions before the bodies have even been buried make me sick. The news is also attacking the police force of Blacksburg for not responding quick enough. The first shooting, which took the lives of two individuals was believed to be an isolated event. Authorities acted on the incidence, but did not inspect the whole campus for the suspect. The problem I have here is that this is a sensitive matter and it needs to be disected analyzed and examined by the proper authorities. Until then everyone, EXCEPT THE IMMEADIATE FAMILY needs to keep their opinions to their self. Report the news don't try to make it. You're a DAMN journalist. Do your job. You need to remember that people died and the journalist that are ready to put blame at an issue like this make me sick. They are a disgrace to the profession.

    Posted by Shannon27 at 04/17/2007 @ 12:40am

61. I don't claim to know the answer...but it's not a simple one. The reality is there is something very violent about our society. We all need to reflect on what is so wrong with our society that we regularly produce people who go on these rampages.

    Posted by WANGJEXI 04/16/2007 @ 11:08pm

    Our violent society regularly produces people who go on rampages?? A University with 25,000 students has 1 guy go off, who is not even an American, and possibly not even a student there. I can't agree at all with your statement. Show me a place or a country where this could never happen, and I'll be impressed.

    Posted by Sliver at 04/17/2007 @ 12:51am

62. Yes, there will be lots of questions about this tragedy. But to me there are only 2: 1. What will it take to make ordinary Americans and their leaders stand up to the NRA? 2. Why do so many people who decry violence in real life spend their money and time watching violence as "entertainment"? To be specific, I'll mention the ad for the film "The Fracture", whose hook is "I shot my wife" appears at the top of this very article bemoaning violence. When a whole society methodically desensitizes itself, what can it expect? Parents, where are you? Are you giving your kids the money to watch violence as entertainment?

    Posted by karatoprak at 04/17/2007 @ 01:53am

63. The terribly flawed notion of many anti-gun proselytizers is the honest truth that gun owners do not easily fit into ANY PARTICULAR cultural, economic, or political box. The ranking senator of my state is both a Democrat, pro-choice, and receives an A+ rating from the NRA. They are true to their one-issue mantra - they will endorse anyone as long as you support the 2nd. There are, in all likelihood, well over 200 million firearms in the United States, and this figure comes from surveys, in which firearms owners are notoriously tight-lipped. These firearms CANNOT be strictly the province of white, red-state "redneck" males. There simply are not enough of them. Added to this is the reality that firearm ownership has grown since 9/11 and Katrina. People realize that there are limits to what the government can do.

    Posted by Anti-Climacus at 04/17/2007 @ 02:01am

64. Unfortunately for you left wingers the tragic events reflect less on the "gun culture" and "violence" in American culture, than the innane self esteem centered world you have created. The me first and can never have any hurt feeling enviroment that you have pressed on our society creates individuals like this.

    People like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were taught from a very young age that they should never experience anything bad and that they were the center of the universe. Therefore, when things when bad for them they got even.

    Althought the gun-nuts are totally off base to think that arming themselves is the appropriate response to violence, the gun-control nuts are equally, if not more so, by thinking that there is some system of laws that can stop events like this, gun violence, or just violence in general.

    Posted by mhouse at 04/17/2007 @ 02:42am

65. Will a journalist at The Nation research school shootings in America over the last 100 years? ABC went back to Texas, 1966. Pretty scary stuff, the frequency over the last 15 years. I am curious to know a concise history. What was happening in the 50's, the 30's during the Great Depression? How many children were shooting children in public high schools and universities throughout the years of World War II? From 1966 to 1988 there was one such incident. Kent State. That was young National Guardsment shooting kids in 1970.

    Posted by Henry Miller at 04/17/2007 @ 07:34am

66. SLIVER, you big Knight in shining Armour, when you goin' to Iraq?

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/17/2007 @ 08:13am

67. TO JOHN NICHOLS:

    Yes John, you're probably right about the NRA and their "don't blame the gun" response. But they won't be any quicker than you and your type hitting us with this "culture of violence" nonsense. How predictable. Do you think ANY of those kids were part of your "culture"? I think not. I think they can deal with our society as it is without turning to violence. And when one can't, like the shooter could not, then there's something wrong with him and he needs to get help.

    You clowns always blame "our culture" for the actions of 1 freak. You really don't know what the hell your're talking about.

    May those kids rest in peace, and my condolences to their families.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/17/2007 @ 09:16am

68. Watching Bowling for Columbine would be pointless since this shooter wasn't born and raised here.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 04/17/2007 @ 10:24am

69. Posted by I'M NOBODY 04/17/2007 @ 10:24am

    A point I was just getting ready to make.

    Cho Seung-hui was from South Korea. Hard to blame "America's culture of violence" on somebody who grew up in another country.

    Posted by Mask at 04/17/2007 @ 10:26am

70. Although I support the right to bear arms and for anyone to be able to own any kind of weapon, I don't think that would have changed the outcome at VTech or Columbine. Sliver valiantly insults the victims of Columbine who were hiding behind desks instead of shooting back at the trench coat mafia, but I wonder just how well Sliver would have performed under those circumstances.

    What will people say when the armed innocent bystanders of a shooting spree open fire on the original shooter and hit other innocent bystanders themselves? What will they say when the police show up and have to shoot not only the original shooters, but the armed bystanders who are engaged in a shoot-out with them? How will the police know who the "good guys" are and who the "bad guys" are?

    Posted by bjkron at 04/17/2007 @ 11:43am

71. My heart breaks for the parents of these slain students. I am afraid this will be another whitewash of the truth, single shooter theory. Seems a little coincidental as Gonzales was supposed to testify on this day and this happens. Another Bush/Clinton cabal diversion. I know this sounds far out, but not impossible.

    Posted by Sinatra at 04/17/2007 @ 11:50am

72. My name is Vincent Chatel, just enter my name on Google and you'll see who I am. I'm living in Belgium and I'm a reader of The Nation. I've worked in the USA, have many friends there, some are conservatives, some others are others democrats. By no way I can be accused of beeing anti-american. My first time in the USA was in 1979, and, since then, I have been there at least three dozen times, working, visiting friends, trying to understand your culture, and what you call the "American Way of Life". Many here in Europe see Americans as dumb, hamburger and gun addicted people. I spend a hell of time explaining that this is not true, that the American culture is rich, vast and that saying Americans are just a bunch of rednecks willing to shoot anybody who opposes their view is just plain stupid. You know what? I'm tired. I'm tired to defend this country I do love. I'm tired to repeat again and again "Guys, Colombine shootings were just an accident, America is better than that". And here it comes again. Tell me: when are you going to say enough is enough? When are you going to say "we do need a gun control". How many deaths you need to realize your current gun legislation is just crap, that no citizen should be allowed to wear gun, except police and army force? Because that's the case here in Belgium and France, and many European contries. Think about it: did you ever heard about a Virginia Tech massacre in Europe? Sorry for my bad English, BTW

    Posted by June6112 at 04/17/2007 @ 1:06pm

73. Posted by SINATRA 04/17/2007 @ 11:50am

    Is this serious (as RESE usually is)?...or a bad joke?

    Posted by Mask at 04/17/2007 @ 1:09pm

74. Just want to share a poem I wrote this morning about the insanity of it all.

    4/17/07 HIDDEN TREASURES LOST AT SEA I'm standing on the battlefield The enemy, he just won't yield I guess it's not such a great big deal To have breakfast be my last meal

    Got a story to tell someone But it's a little gory son About a boy who picked up a gun And started killing everyone

    Oh no baby, not again Insanity, let's pray, "AMEN!" How do we ever try and defend Against such lunacy my dear friend

    I'm talking bout you and me And hidden treasures lost at sea Help me find a safe place to be Before the crazy man smiles at me

    Back on the ground I'm looking up So hard to drink again from this cup It doesn't matter just how tough We think we are enough's enough

    Although they say it "be thy will" I can't swallow this here pill You can't claim to love me still While you let them kill and kill

    Oh no baby not again Insanity, let's pray, "AMEN!" How do we ever try and defend Against such lunacy in ones head

    I'm talking bout you and me And hidden treasures lost at sea Help me find a safe place to be Before the crazy man smiles at me

    I'm talking bout you and me And hidden treasures lost at sea Help me find a safe place to be Before the crazy man smiles at me

    John LeVan

    Posted by Lucem ferre at 04/17/2007 @ 1:09pm

75. Posted by JUNE6112 04/17/2007 @ 1:06pm

    Vincent, there's a flaw in your thinking and it's this--

    Upto the 1934 National Firearms Act, it was LEGAL in this country for civilians to own sub-machine guns (like the Tommy gun).

    And there were no "campus massacres".

    Posted by Mask at 04/17/2007 @ 1:12pm

76. I'm not trying to take all your guns, just the ones that can kill dozens of people in seconds. I'd even push for the allowance of guns substantially more efficient than the muskets referred to in the Constitution. I wish my Brethren would lose the zero tolerance rhetoric, but it will remain as long as the gun lobby has money. Philadelphia currently has the highest body count- several years ago the gun lobby successfully overturned in the courts a voter supported ban on assault weapons. Thanks. I'm not saying our toll would be much less, but at least the killers would not be using weapons deemed legal- Much easier to get assult weapons off the street when their mere existence is illegal.

    Posted by phillymark at 04/17/2007 @ 1:17pm

77. Posted by PHILLYMARK 04/17/2007 @ 1:17pm

    PHILLY, again....how would that have stopped Cho?

    He had a 9mm and took extra clips. Unless you ban handguns ENTIRELY. Then the next guy uses two pump action shotguns and we have to ban those (despite promises that it would "never come to banning hunting/skeet weapons"). Etc., etc., etc.

    The "zero tolerance" guys are on BOTH sides of the aisle, if you look.

    BTW...nothing about "muskets" in the Constitution.

    Posted by Mask at 04/17/2007 @ 2:02pm

78. Posted by Mask 4/17/2007 @1:09 PM Reply Serious. Please review the events since the death of John F. Kennedy, study the history of catastrophic events and who would benefit from the event. I know it sounds cynical, but history should be our view into the past and to our detriment, we choose to ignore it.

    Posted by Sinatra at 04/17/2007 @ 2:59pm

79. Mask- There is no way to stop Cho. I just like the idea that maybe he should not have been able to buy the Glock legally. The state and my tax dollars become complicit. Don't tell me a sportsman needs a Glock- Unless that sportsman is a straw purchaser. BTW- The constitution didn't spell out m-u-s-k-e-t, but the "WELL REGULATED militia" primarily used muskets.

    Posted by phillymark at 04/17/2007 @ 3:06pm

80. We are a violent country and we glorify violence. Just waiting in the subway and looking at all the movie posters, I ALWAYS see "heroes" and "villains" with guns in their hands. And it cuts both ways - Hollywood Liberals glorify violence in movies as much as the Hollywood Right. It's the American way.

    Posted by LDEYAB at 04/17/2007 @ 3:08pm

81. Last weekend "This film is not yet rated" came up in my Netflix queue, and I couldn't help but think about how it related to the culture of violence.

    Sex is suppressed in much popular media, but violence is allowed - even glorified. It's not surprising how that affects our culture...

    Posted by ericgu at 04/17/2007 @ 3:46pm

82. Guns are such a small part of understanding this tragedy, as I think most posters are quite well aware. But one has to have at least a sneaking suspicion that somethig is up ... school shootings do seem to be particularly american events of the last 30-40 years.

    I dont pretend to have the answer, but I will put forward a theory related to the culture of violence theme: the American mindset has been too long conditioned to believing there is such a thing as "good violence." While most Europeans believe ALL violence is bad, in most of America it depends: how about the torture on "24?" Or Dirty Harry blasting the bad guys who we cant trust the system to punish? Or veterans punching out folks who burn the American flag? There are many examples of situations in American culture where violence is seen as an appropriate response.

    Obviously the VT shooter's opinion of whats appropriate is not the same as most. But maybe we would have a little less violence in our society if we all beleived that all violence was bad, and that even when necessary (like in self defense) it is not a good ending. Just maybe then the delusional would not see shooting up a bunch of people in a revenge-suicide fantasy as a "glorious" way to go out and be remembered. Maybe.

    Posted by Skallagrim at 04/17/2007 @ 4:36pm

83. Posted by I'M NOBODY 04/17/2007 @ 10:24am

    Posted by MASK 04/17/2007 @ 10:26am

    The shooter lived in the U.S. for the last 15 years, since he was eight years old.

    Posted by Hman23 at 04/17/2007 @ 5:37pm

84. The events, if I can refer to them as such, at Virginia tech on Monday are horrifying. All I can do, as I stand as a far-away witness to this senseless violence, is express my condolences to the community and families who have lost someone and mourn those lost and pray to whatever god that may be listening that the wound in the collective human heart that allows these things to happen may be healed. The knowledge that these kids were lined up execution style and shot shatters my heart. I cannot imagine what was going through their minds, and I will not pretend to. When the time comes to truly confront what happened, we must ask ourselves if our culture precipitates such acts as this. We must do something about our gun laws, and we must turn away from being a society that works for war and spends more on the military than all nations combined, and become a nation that works for peace and shows love to all.

    Posted by penguins1 at 04/17/2007 @ 6:41pm

85. HMAN-Who you are is pretty much set before the age of eight,but I suppose 15 years of more growing up will have it's influence,but this is only the second time that a non white male raised by American parents did something like this and I suspect the cause won't be found in Bowling for Columbine.This feels different for some reason.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 04/17/2007 @ 6:58pm

86. It appears that Mr. Nichols is one of the physicians who needs to heal himself.

    This is the statement on the NRA's website. It's been there for two days:

    "The National Rifle Association joins the entire country in expressing our deepest condolences to the families of Virginia Tech University and everyone else affected by this horrible tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families. We will not have further comment until all the facts are known."

    On a day Mr. Nichols declares was a day "when it would be better to simply remain silent," who was silent? The NRA was silent. The Nation, or at least Mr. Nichols, was "beyond shame."

    Posted by DGrenne at 04/17/2007 @ 7:04pm

87. HMAN-That didn't come out right.What I meant was that the other rampage killers were white males raised by American parents except for the native American teenager and now this person.Since he started out his informative years in another culture I think we'll find that this case is different, although I could be wrong and we discover that he did develop a fascination with violence after moving here.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 04/17/2007 @ 7:16pm

88. HERE IS THE GREAT NEW LIB ICON SPEWING A DISGUSTING SELF SERVING SPEECH:

    But while Obama mourns the slain students, he takes the massacre more as a theme than as a point of discussion.

    "Maybe nothing could have been done to prevent it," he says toward the end.

    So he moves quickly to the abstract: Violence, and the general place of violence in American life.

    "There's also another kind of violence that we're going to have to think about. It's not necessarily the physical violence, but the violence that we perpetrate on each other in other ways," he said, and goes on to catalogue other forms of "violence."

    There's the "verbal violence" of Imus.

    YOU FUCKING LIBZ MAKE ME TOTALLY SICK....YOU ARE ALL DISGRACEFUL SCUM OF THE EARTH....YOU CANT EVEN LET THE VICTIMS GET BURIED BEFORE YOU TRY TO USE THIS TRAGEDY FOR YOUR OWN SELFISH TRAITOROUS POLITICAL GAINS....I HOPE THIS FUCKING BACKFIRES ON YOU ASSHOLES BIG TIME

    FUCK ALL OF YOU TRAITOROUS LIBZ

    Posted by looneylefties at 04/17/2007 @ 7:56pm

89. ARE YOU DETESTABLE LIBZ PROUD OF THIS SHIT????????

    Less than 24 hours after the deadliest shooting spree in U.S. history, liberal Rep. Jim Moran took to the airwaves to launch a political attack against President Bush, congressional Republicans and the National Rifle Association.

    Appearing on the "Jack Diamond Morning Show" on 107.3 FM in Northern Virginia, Moran suggested Republicans were to blame for Monday's tragedy at Virginia Tech, which left 33 dead and injured another 30. The anti-gun congressman said Republican policies made it easy for the shooter to obtain a gun.

    When the show's host tried to suggest that the gunman may have been hellbent on killing regardless of the law, Moran turned the conversation back to the GOP, complaining that the United States needs a national registry to track all firearms purchases and more stringent gun-control laws. Moran then blamed Bush and Republicans in Congress for opposing such measures at the behest of the NRA.

    When I called Moran's press secretary, Austin Durrer, this morning to get an explanation, I was told Durrer wasn't available. If you'd like to call, the office number is (202) 225-4376. I've also put in a request with the "Jack Diamond Morning Show" to get the audio of the conversation. (I was driving when the interview took place.)

    Moran has a history of making politically charged comments that have landed him in hot water. In 2003, he said Jews were responsible for pushing the U.S. to war with Iraq. He later apologized, but not before an uproar in the Jewish community.

    GOD HELP OUR COUNTRY AGAINST THE ENEMY FROM WITHIN.....YOU TRAITOROUS LIBZ

    Posted by looneylefties at 04/17/2007 @ 7:57pm

90. People kill. Schpeeple kill. Any airhead who is of the human species and above a particular age realizes that we are not yet at that stage of cars driving themselves, nor guns firing themselves. But one would believe we are surely at that stage of re-evaluating so-called "constitutional rights"...especially since many of those "rights" are re-evaluated every day...except for this one. Hmmm.

    Any airhead, or bullet head, can figure out if that that inanimate object didn't have a person at the other end, or if that person didn't have that specific inanimate object in hand ...

    And, by the by, this goes out to Americans who cite statistics of other countries - I of both American and Canadian heritage invite every one of youse guys to take a look specifically at those so-called gun restriction laws you say do no good (sic).

    If you did look just a little bit closer, you would see that the word "restricting" in this context means fairly little. Automatics are still allowed in Canada (check out shooting so-called "rampages" here). To say that gun control and restrictions on gun ownership do nothing to lower the number of people killed is like saying that since all our wising-up to climate change and driving hybrids is doing nothing to stop global warming, we should just forget about it. That's human nature and that's the way society is headed. Furthermore, it's people who cause global warming, and why not just go out and rev up our SUV's again?

    Posted by dreamsmoke at 04/17/2007 @ 8:42pm

91. Adam Geller Of The Associated Press reports:

    One law enforcement official said Cho's backpack contained a receipt for a March purchase of a Glock 9 mm pistol. Cho held a green card, meaning he was a legal, permanent resident, federal officials said. That meant he was eligible to buy a handgun unless he had been convicted of a felony.

    Roanoke Firearms owner John Markell said his shop sold the Glock and a box of practice ammo to Cho 36 days ago for $571.

    "He was a nice, clean-cut college kid. We won't sell a gun if we have any idea at all that a purchase is suspicious," Markell said. Markell said it is not unusual for college kids to make purchases at his shop as long as they are old enough.

    "To find out the gun came from my shop is just terrible," Markell said.

    ... well? Maybe it should be just a little bit harder than that to obtain a piece of hardware that can end the lives of others.

    Are walk-in, over-the-counter gun sales really necessary?

    It's harder to get a driver's license in this country than it is to obtain a gun. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

    Posted by maddox at 04/17/2007 @ 9:42pm

92. A University with 25,000 students has 1 guy go off, who is not even an American, and possibly not even a student there . . . .Show me a place or a country where this could never happen, and I'll be impressed.

    Posted by Silver

    Killeen, Columbine, the Amish school and now Virginia Tech. and you lecture as if this event was some sort of exceptionally rare, one off.

    What does it take before you and the others in denial will admit that habitual mass murders in American schools signify something seriously wrong in a country drunk on gun culture? Answers won't come easy but they sure as hell have to be sought.

    Posted by inveresk at 04/17/2007 @ 10:02pm

93. Read actual research on the points posed in Bowling for Columbine (such as the research conducted by David T. Hardy). Whether you consider yourself a conservative or liberal, look elsewhere other than Moore to justify your argument.

    Posted by common_sense at 04/17/2007 @ 10:49pm

94. a truly violent country he should visit England or Ireland or France or any other leftie country which outlaws guns. There is true violence there.

    Posted by CTHICKS52

    The reasons the words "ignorant" and "horseshit" spring to mind?

    Around 30,000 deaths by guns in America each year. In Britain, which has 20% of your population, the last year for which figures were available (2003) confirms total gun deaths at 163.

    Posted by inveresk at 04/17/2007 @ 10:59pm

95. Cho Seung-hui was from South Korea. Hard to blame "America's culture of violence" on somebody who grew up in another country.

    Posted by MASK 04/17/2007 @ 10:26am

    Yes, he was born in South Korea, but his family moved here in 1992 when he was eight years old. So, he grew up in this country.

    Posted by wangjexi at 04/18/2007 @ 03:48am

96. Yes he grew up in American---Detroit and Northern Virginia=DC suburbs. Some have wanted to blame southern/rural American and the hunting/gun culture that they feel contributed to this disaster. The shooter grew up in urban America. Centreville Virgnia is part of the northeast corridor megalopolis. Culturaly it is no where near like Blacksburg, Virginia in SW VA. People in Virginia often joke that NOVA (northern Virginia) is like it's own state and has very little in common with the rest of Virginia. In fact, Nova is one of the few democrat strongholds in the state along with inner city Richmond, Roanoke, and Tidewater. The rest of the state is, with few exceptions, solid republican.

    Posted by Len Mosse at 04/18/2007 @ 07:43am

97. America is a vast place with mental illness in all corners. Thankfully, most sick people don't kill 32 people- and that includes all national and cultural origins. We will never agree on gun control- but every time something like this happens, I hope it is a reminder to all sellers, buyers, and owners- that their precious guns are all potential instruments of great, great, sadness.

    Posted by phillymark at 04/18/2007 @ 09:55am

98. Thoughts on the Shootings by a VPI Alumna, Navy veteran and peace activist:

    All of us need time and silence to mourn the lost children and professors of Virginia Polytechnic in Blacksburg, VA. I received my MA in Medieval Studies and Medieval Philosophy from there, which in the 1970s was called "VPI & SU", "Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University". VPI & VSU shared the same campus and administration, and a few years later it all became "VPI". Being in those days a wife and the mother of a kindergartner as well as an eager student, I had no time to meet those on the VPI side, but today I'm shocked by what has happened at my alma mater, the needless waste and suffering caused by someone who could get his hands on a weapon of mass destruction.

    So let us mourn. But. . . keep three things in mind.

    The first, our ubiquitous culture of violence, is discussed in an April 17th NATION blog article sent around today by a veteran friend, Dave. I was on the staff of the University of Texas at Austin, within easy memory of the mid-1960s murders of 15 students from the Texas Tower by a student named Charles Whitman, who killed himself and was later discovered by autopsy to have had a brain tumor. Every day for two years I walked beneath the Texas Tower across the Quad. Charles Whitman was a name always in the back of my mind, and I suspect in everyone else's. "Could it happen again?" Of course it could, and we knew it.

    Second, in an email this morning Bill, another vet friend, pointed out that a massacre of these proportions happens to Iraqis twice a day. Our British allies have corroborated the figure of about 650,000 Iraqis killed in the violence from day one of the invasion in March 2003--although our officials do not ackowledge this number, having been careful to avoid body counts. And every time an American helicopter goes down, young soldiers die together Together or separately, our troops continue to die for nothing--3,309 according to this morning's official DOD count, which is always too low. I am enraged at our president for sentimentalizing and trivializing the deaths of the VPI students by making so much moan while neglecting the safety and health of our troops and veterans, sneaking the coffins of the dead ones back to the States without ceremonies or photographs as if they were no more than hampers of dirty clothes, never attending a soldier's funeral, and refusing to answer simple questions like "What noble cause?" Needless to say, Bush gives no thought whatsoever to the Iraqi children, women and old men who have become innocent victims of Shock and Awe and the civil war caused by our invasion and occupation of Iraq, or to the civilian victims of our inept war in Afghanistan.

    Third--I turned on the morning TV news to get an up-to-date weather report. There was none. On every channel the cloned ghouls were out in full force--each one the same artificial-looking, carefully-coiffed monster. They are the prying, slavering ones who pose as "news" reporters, and this morning they stalked the campus shoving microphones into VPI students' mouths. "How do you feel about what happened?" (How would the students feel? How would YOU feel, monster? Let the bereaved alone to grieve for their friends.) When any kind of disaster happens, the TV vampires pounce on the throats of the innocent in such a way as to fictionalize the disaster, make it "thrilling" and "entertaining." Easy access to weapons is not the only source of our culture of violence. The immense vulgarity of the media contributes its share. The VPI killer, like Charles Whitman and most of their kind, took his own life and is silenced by death, but whether or not he had a brain tumor, it's likely that in his warped mind he craved the fifteen minutes of notoriety that TV always provides to the ones who commit the most atrocious acts of violence.

    Posted by BONGOBIMBO at 04/18/2007 @ 10:34am

99. Oh, my...here we are again - the gun issue.

    There is a cultural issue which transcends guns: the use of weapons, the killing rate in America (the highest in the world that is not considered outright genocide) and the world's largest penal system with millions incarcerated.

    It's easy to pull out the 2nd Ammmendment and declare that it's our "right" when it's all too clear that the intent was for a militia and since we have a professional militia fully armed - such an ammendment really makes no sense. That said, again, the issue is not guns per se but the slaughter which occurs on a daily basis. This is beyond a doubt the most violent "developed" nation on the planet. That's a fact. The holy wars about "gun rights" is a red herring and really superflous to the real deep and hideous cultural problems we face on so many fronts.

    Last, but not least, consider:

    Meanwhile we've got our usual shoot 'em up in Bagdhad going on at a scale that dwarfs what happened at Virgina Tech. Just imagine state of Virgina getting hit with these kinds of "attacks" 3 or 4 times a day - then you'll have a sense of the havoc we've created in Iraq; and how this cultural problem reaches beyond our shores to our foreign "policy".

    Posted by Maxfield at 04/18/2007 @ 10:36am

100. I would also like to add to my previous post - that the particular act of one gunman can be taken in isolation; that the Virgina Tech tragedy is isolated as are all acts - at some level - but at another level these acts need to be taken as a whole act which while shocking - have long lost the air of an anomaly.

     The violence we live in, that surrounds us, is not unique. That one person picks up a gun and uses it to slaughter is a reminder of this - it highlights what is American culture even though, strictly speaking, it is the act of one person at some point in time. And it is that context that should not be lost in understanding what happened; and happens in smaller numbers on a daily basis.

     Posted by Maxfield at 04/18/2007 @ 11:05am

101. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws [and crazed Koreans] will have guns" QED

     Posted by Magnocephalus at 04/18/2007 @ 12:37pm

102. To quote a thought buried in a post above:

     "I am enraged at our president for sentimentalizing and trivializing the deaths of the VPI students by making so much moan while neglecting the safety and health of our troops and veterans, sneaking the coffins of the dead ones back to the States without ceremonies or photographs as if they were no more than hampers of dirty clothes, never attending a soldier's funeral, and refusing to answer simple questions like "What noble cause?" "

     How that rat-face can shamelessly whore for votes and political "cover" in moments like this is to make one want to vomit!

     QED

     Posted by Magnocephalus at 04/18/2007 @ 1:17pm

103. The shooter provided abundant signs of his rage and potentially murderous nature and was referred to the few resources that might have prevented the massacre. This event provides little in the way of useful lessons on how the next brooding and angry loner with an automatic weapon could be stopped. I think it is safe to predict that this will not be last such killing spree. In a nation of 300 million people we will have a small number who will not be identified nor deterred once identified, as this individaul was. What we have is a systems problem - a nation that has permitted commerce in military weapons which have no place in society. They're not hunting weapons. They are best suited for killing people. Bob Dylan sang..."I saw guns and sharp knives in the hands of young children". The grownups of America have failed one of society's first priorities - basic safety - by again allowing these weapons to be sold. Congress and the President allowed the ban on assault weapons to expire in 2004. The ban should be restored. It is not a full solution, but it should be part of a systematic response to something that is clearly broken in our society.

     Posted by peterbraun at 04/18/2007 @ 1:34pm

104. By the same token, the notion that banning those weapons will end the violence has become a a tougher sell. Shocking and horrible rampages occur in countries with stricter gun laws than the U.S. No, they do not happen as frequently. But they do happen.

     .... yes, Mr. Nichols, and they happen with guns as well, because guns make it a lot easier. For suicides as well, by the way. And there is a certain violence in the country that one does not find all over the place, and writing "Period. End of Story" does not carry sufficient weight to contradict that (I refer to Mr. Cohen above). It is like saying Hitler was just a crazy SOB who went on a rampage. No: as of a certain number, I guess, one can begin talking of a collective guilt factor. And the rampages are not the only killing events. There are many more, most of which we never hear about. Is it a violent nation? I don't know.

     It is not so much an extrovert violence, but an incredible amount of repressed emotion. I am speaking as an outsider who has observed this phenomenon. In America, most emotion amongst young people -- and older ones as well, but it is less damaging then -- is met by prescribing meds or sending some kid to counseling. I met so many people who were simply incapable of responding to emotion. Then there is a cult of violence. Ms. Jackson has a bra slip, and an uproar ensues. But a daily drumfire of the most egregious violence on TV and in video games phases no one.

     Catspaw

     Posted by Catspaw at 04/18/2007 @ 5:39pm

105. First of all, Cho may have been born in South Korea, but he had been in the United States since he was 8 1/2. He was 23 when he went batshit and 15 years is more than enough time for someone to soak up all of the culture of violence that he or she can stand and apply it accordingly.

     Secondly, according to the news coverage I've read about this incident, there were warning signs all over the place when it comes to this guy. He was writing violent plays. He was stalking women. One of his teachers even went to the head of Virginia Tech's English Department and threatened to quit if she had to continue teaching him because he was freaking his fellow students out so bad that they stopped coming to class.

     In fact, the head of the English department started teaching Cho one-on-one after she went to the police, school administrators and various other entities to try and get him help and no one did anything.

     But while folks here will defend the Second Amendment like came down from stone tablets from a mountain, I submit that when it's applied as liberally as most of you want it to be, scared, mixed up, crazy kids get guns....and in some cases go on to kill a whole lot of people.

     I live in Philly as well (hi PhillyMark!) and unfortunately we're in the midst of our third year of "Gunfight on the OK Corral." Guns are far too easy to get in the City of Brotherly Love and everytime that we ask the folks in Pennsylvania's Alabama Section (Harrisburg) for the right to more stringently regulate guns in the city, we get a resounding no. In fact, one of our most powerful state senators, Sen. Vincent Fumo, has a big NRA rug in his office and a shooting range in his mansion.

     No one is saying to pull all of the guns off of the streets, although it wouldn't bother me one bit were that to happen. What I am saying is that there needs to be more oversight. I don't think oversight is bad. I mean, if it were up to some of you, there would be all kinds of oversight over whether or not I had a kid.

     Because I too am a Philly girl, and I'm sick and tired of picking up a copy of the Daily News with yet another dead young person staring back at me, I have problems with the belief that you should be able to have as many of any kind of gun you want. The only place who's gun laws are worse than Virginia's is Pennsylvania. There has to be some restraints, otherwise you have the carnage that Philly folks like myself and PhillyMark see far too often

     Posted by edwriter at 04/18/2007 @ 5:58pm

106. I meant to cut off the last paragraph in my last post. feel free to ignore it.

     Posted by edwriter at 04/18/2007 @ 5:59pm

107. While I certainly agree that some of our American culture has a violent streak, and that topic is certainly worthy of serious discussion, to blithely answer the question, "Why did this happen" with the answer, "America is a violent country," is eo engage in what can be described, most charitably, as intellectual laziness. This event, monumentally tragic though it was, was a one-off event. Rushing to find an easy bogeyman on which to cast blame -- even if that bogeyman is a valid issue in its own right -- leads us down a path that represents exponentially more danger to us, as a society, than the occasional person who goes off the deep end and does something horrific.

     Have we learned nothing from what happened in the post 9/11 era, when in our collective hysteria we rolled over and allowed things like the Patriot Act to sail through virtually unchallenged?

     Please, let us avoid exploiting this event (even if the exploitation is unintended) in the service of our pet causes, how ever valid those causes may be.

     Mark Kessinger New York, New York mpkessin@gmail.com

     Posted by mpkessinger at 04/18/2007 @ 8:00pm

108. Well -- while we're at it, let's blame Leftist Anti-Rich, anti-privilage culture. It must be of at least some satisfaction to The Nation that Cho Seung-Hui throughly absorbed the "fact" that the rich are at the root of all evil. Given that most of the victims were white and rich [bright.net], maybe at least The Nation should cut the guy some slack.

     Posted by nycsky at 04/18/2007 @ 8:14pm