Shooting amps up gun debate

By: Alexander Trowbridge, Staff Writer
Posted: 4/25/07

The shooting at Virginia Tech last week put the gun control issue back in the national public forum.

While Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine dismissed taking political advantage of the incident as deplorable, both pro-gun groups and those advocating gun control rallied for change.

Barbara Hohlt, executive director of States United to Prevent Gun Violence, said stricter gun laws could have saved lives at Va. Tech.

"We do a very poor job in this country at doing adequate background checks."

Pro-gun advocates attacked gun-free safe zones such as the Va. Tech campus, which they claim prevented victims from protecting themselves.

Carl Abbe, the owner and president of Calibers Indoor Gun Range in Greensboro, said gun-free zones let criminals know that no one is there to stop them.

Abbe said Va. Tech should consider arming and training select members of the campus community to defend their fellow classmates.

"If that one professor who blocked the door had had a handgun, he would have been able to do more than just block the door," Abbe said. "He would have been able to stop that man."

The N.C. House passed a bill on Thursday that would allow judges to carry concealed weapons.

Rep. Walter Church, D-Burke, sponsored the bill and said it was a response to the shooting of a judge in a courtroom in Atlanta last year.

"The judges that I've talked to thought it was a good idea," Church said, adding that even those who don't carry guns appreciate the attention to their security.

The passage of the bill just days after the shooting at Va. Tech concerned some N.C. residents.

Lisa Price, executive director of the North Carolinians Against Gun Violence Education Fund, said courtrooms already are protected.

"In general, we dislike putting guns in more places," Price said.

The issue of gun control is complex, and in North Carolina it is not always divided along party lines.

Though Church sponsored the bill allowing judges to carry concealed weapons, he said he supports gun control and restrictions. He said the lack of a waiting period to purchase hand guns in Virginia is ridiculous.

"I would support someone having a waiting period, especially those with mental cases."

Rep. Verla Insko, D-Orange, voted against Church's bill. However, she said she would oppose restricting everyone with a history of mental illness from purchasing a gun.

"That is a very broad category of illnesses," she said, adding that while those at risk for violence should not be eligible to purchase handguns, not everyone with a mental illness is violent.

--

Original Source:<a href=ttp://media.www.dailytarheel.com/media/storage/paper885/news/2007/04/25/StateNational/Shooting.Amps.Up.Gun.Debate-2878831.shtml>The Daily Tar Heel - April 25, 2007</a>

Alexander Trowbridge

2007-07-16

Sara Hood

Kevin Schwartz <kschwartz@unc.edu>

eng

Our Opinion: Gun Control

<strong>Emory&#39;s Campus No Place For Guns</strong><br />
Issue date: 5/1/07<br />
Section: Editorials

The recent controversy concerning funding for a College Republicans&#39; trip to a shooting range has brought the issues of gun control and campus safety to the forefront of the Emory discourse.

Last Wednesday, College Council denied the College Republicans funding to help pay for a trip to a local shooting range. The College Republicans said they hoped the trip would promote safe and responsible gun handling and ownership. College Council legislators say they withheld the funds due to safety concerns, even going so far as to propose an amendment to the organization&#39;s monetary code prohibiting the use of College Council funds to purchase or rent firearms and ammunition.

Generally speaking, we believe College Council should be able to fund activities like a trip to the shooting range. Shooting is a sport recognized by the NCAA, and shooting range sessions monitored by professionals are exceedingly safe. Amending the monetary code to prevent such trips is unwarranted.

It&#39;s unfortunate that the shootings at Virginia Tech took place just weeks before the scheduled date for the trip, but given that the College Republicans had been planning this event for quite some time, we don&#39;t believe the shootings are an adequate reason for the trip to be cancelled. Although some could perceive the trip as insensitive, there is still an immense difference between safely firing a gun at a target and using a gun to commit mass murder. If the College Republicans want to take a trip to the shooting range, then they should receive the same support given to any other group.

What we cannot condone is the College Republicans&#39; plan to request permission from University President James W. Wagner to carry concealed weapons on campus. This idea was proposed by nationally syndicated radio host Lars Larson on whose show Tittsworth appeared to discuss the Council&#39;s decision to deny funding.

Under current Georgia law, it is illegal for a civilian to carry any sort of weapon or explosive compound while on school property. There&#39;s a reason such a law was passed. We understand the need for protection and the value of feeling safe at school, but we do not believe that allowing more guns on campus will help foster the open learning environment we want at the University.

Allowing guns on campus would propagate an atmosphere tinged with the spectre of possible violence. This would make us less safe, rather than moreso. The only people who should be allowed guns on campus are those who have gone through rigorous training to become certified in their use and have taken an oath to protect the citizenry - in this case, the Emory Police Department.

The College Republicans should realize that by tying the issue of funding from College Council to the ludicrous question of concealed weapons on campus, they are only hurting their prospects of getting that money in the future. Who would want to give money for a shooting range trip to a group that has expressed its desire to carry concealed weapons on campus?

As the Second Amendment states, there is a place for guns in our society. The shooting range is one of those places - Emory&#39;s campus is not.

--

Original Source: <a href= http://media.www.emorywheel.com/media/storage/paper919/news/2007/05/01/Editorials/Our-Opinion.Gun.Control-2889391.shtml> Emory Wheel - May 1, 2007</a>

Editorial Staff

2007-07-11

Sara Hood

"Christopher H. Megerian" <cmegeri@LearnLink.Emory.Edu>

eng

Reflections on Virginia Tech

By Billy McMorris
Apr 17 2007

<b>John Manetta Once Told Me</b>

In early modern Europe the infant mortality rate was astronomical. Crude medical practices led to a high casualty rate for mother and child alike. In many cases, new mothers would be forced to rely on lying-in-maids to handle maternal responsibilities, while they recovered from the exhausting and traumatic experience of child birth.

Lying-in-maids were generally post-menopausal widows, who were unable to mother children themselves. If new- born children were to become sick or die, grieving mothers, in some cases already afflicted with post partum depression, would look for some sort of explanation for why their child did not survive infancy.

In some cases, the dazed and depressed mother would come to a genius conclusion: the lying-in-maid was a witch. Accusations were launched against close family friends and next door neighbors ... even the child&#39;s grandmother could find herself burned at the stake if she did not make sure that baby survived until the mother could fulfill her maternal role. These infertile women could not use their feminine power to care for the infant, and instead chose to use sorcery to bring about harm. Apparently all one needs is a scapegoat to survive the grieving process.

America, however, is no different than these mourning mothers. Any major tragedy is immediately followed with a blame game of epic proportions. Calls for inquiries, hearings, firings and resignations are launched before words of condolence are even expressed. When we as a culture engage in this sort of "dialogue," we take the event away from those who are affected by it, and try to center it around our own vanity. It is perhaps the most despicable thing about our culture; it&#39;s even more revolting than a cult following of Paris Hilton. But still, everyone is chiming in on Virginia Tech.

The student activists are complaining that, "if it wasn&#39;t for Charlton Heston or the &#39;gun nuts,&#39; this would have never happened." Can&#39;t the explanation for such an event simply be an evil person doing an evil thing? Is it really Charlton Heston&#39;s fault that some kid went crazy?

Campus police representatives say that "there was no indication of any possible motive." Evil sounds like a pretty fair assessment of the situation. Nothing but pure evil could truly describe what Cho Seung-Hui did just four days before the eighth anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre.

Psychotherapists have called the murderer&#39;s suicide note "disturbing." "Evil" however, seems a more appropriate word. This is, after all, the same note that the 23-year-old South Korean before killing two people. This is the same note that he wrote before before reloading and taking away 30 more bright futures. In the note, he used the cliché suicide phrase, "you caused me to do this," as if writing it down on paper would make it true. But no one caused him to do this; only pure evil can drive someone to do something so remarkably despicable and cowardly.

Various Virginia Tech students and their parents are calling for resignations and firings because their children could have been killed due to the inadequate response to the first vicious killing. These same people have not given a second thought to the actual victims or their families that did lose a child.

That idiot who lives in your hall is probably still telling that story about how "he almost went to Virginia Tech." Whoa, that&#39;s spooky you herb, some people actually go there; in fact, some people just got murdered there. You might have even seen it on the news. These self-centered malcontents try to do everything they can to make the tragedy about them.

The presidential candidates have begun explaining their positions concerning gun control and second amendment rights. At a time like this, it is disgusting to hear Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton (in her new Southern accent) discuss their stance toward gun control, just as it is repulsive to hear John McCain pander to the National Rifle Association. They are no better than Michael Moore, who is now drooling over the prospect of a sequel to Bowling for Columbine.

These brats and blamers only serve to shift the attention away from the tragedy that befell 32 students and professors, and instead make this horrifying event an impersonal political debate or personal tale. We have plenty of time to do that later.

For now, let&#39;s put down those petitions advocating enhanced gun control or handgun-friendly campus buildings. Why don&#39;t we raise money for the families of that coward&#39;s tragic victims instead? Rather than telling the story about a kid you know who went to Virginia Tech, why don&#39;t you sit down and think about that anonymous Hokie who was robbed of his future.

For now though, let&#39;s think about the victims, their families and those that protect us.

Let&#39;s think about Ryan Clark, one of the first two victims; he died trying to calm that murderous coward down.

Let&#39;s think about the heroism of Prof. Liviu Librescu, who blocked his classroom door with his own body to give his students time to escape before suffering a fatal gunshot wound.

Be thankful that we, too, have professionals willing to protect our university and its students. Thank your R.A.; thank a CUPD officer; thank Robert Davis and Antwan Sampson for making sure you have a Cornell I.D. before entering the library. And thank God for giving us men and women that are here to make sure we never suffer a tragedy of this magnitude.

But most of all, think about the terror that all these victims must have experienced before meeting an untimely end.

Now tell me; do your anecdotes and agendas seem that important now?

<i>Billy McMorris is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be contacted at wjm27@cornell.edu. John Manetta Once Told Me appears alternate Wednesdays.</i>


<b>Comments:</b>

&#39;only pure evil&#39;?

Hi Billy,

I agree with you that it is appalling that the blame game started even before all victims are identified. It is quite ridiculous to start blaming gun control laws, finger pointing the president and police, and forming inquiry panels to find every little fault.

But I strongly disagree with you when you say Cho&#39;s motivation was &#39;only pure evil&#39;. In a way, Cho was a victim himself - a victim because no one tried to help him. He was very lonely, angry, and troubled. There were many warning signs before the massacre happened. He didn&#39;t just wake up one day and snapped; he didn&#39;t get up early 5:30am in the morning because he suddenly wanted to kill.

No one is born evil; no one truly wants to hurt another. If something like this happens, we must examine the circumstances that make people so resentful that they feel they have no recourse but to commit suicides and homicides.

So I will make blame. I blame the university for not heeding the long warning signs. I blame the university counseling for not trying to help him. Cho voluntarily went to a mental hospital and was released; he was taking prescription drugs. Are the psychologists so incompetent that they couldn&#39;t see he was depressed enough to be suicidal? Did no one at the hospital try to reach out to him, connect with him, and get his trust enough to reveal what is troubling him?

There is reason to believe he may have been sexually molested. When police went to search for his parents, the house was deserted. If it were the case that Cho was abused at home or at one point assaulted, then it is not his fault he came to saw the world as not a happy place. No one tried to show him otherwise; no one.

I don&#39;t blame the students for not trying to be friends with him. But I am shocked at the behavior of some of the professors especially Nikki who saw him as a troublesome student that should be kicked out of her class. I commend Professor Roy for having to courage to help Cho and giving him one-on-one workshops. It is the responsibility of professors to not only teach students but also help them and try to make them individuals who will make society thrive.

It is therefore only appropriate to not only give condolences but also try to find reasons that could have led to this nightmare so that this could have been prevented. Yes, blaming the president and police for two hour delay in e-mail message and asking for tighter (or looser) gun control laws is ludicrous because they amount to nothing but finding scapegoats and furthering political agendas. But blaming the university counseling, callous people who drove Cho to his isolation and depression, and people for not heeding the long warning signs is not only appropriate but wise so that in future we can help people like Cho.

-May Zaw
Senior in College of Arts and Sciences
President of Origami Club

<i>By May Zaw (not verified) at April 18, 2007 - 4:46pm</i>

----

I agree with you. It really bothers me how many people&#39;s knee-jerk response to such a tragic event is to find a scapegoat, without even taking time to mourn for the victims and their loved ones.

It does seem strange that he was allowed to stay at VTech despite all the warning signs. Even though hindsight gives you 20-20 vision, the suicidal tendencies coupled with the plays he wrote for writing class ought to have set some alarm bells ringing. But there is no use pointing fingers at anyone - none of it will ever change the fact that over 30 people died on Monday. My prayers are with Virginia Tech.

<i>By Nikhil Chandra (not verified) at April 18, 2007 - 11:55pm </i>

----
To the Editor

Almost as distressing as the horrific event at Virginia Tech is the incessant focus of the media and public on understanding the "rationale"behind the killings. That focus is misplaced. As a psychiatrist it is obvious to me and many of my colleagues that what is really at work here are
the manifestations of an underlying mental disorder. From all the descriptions Mr. Seung-Hui demonstrated an almost textbook example of paranoid schizophrenia. He was motivated to kill because of his delusional thinking. He had grandiose delusions- irrationally saw himself as a martyr like Christ. He was seen giggling to himself and avoiding eye contact on the campus (he was responding to voices in his head, i.e., auditory hallucinations). He had systematized delusions about his fellow classmates- they hated him and were out to harm him (paranoid delusions). He was guarded and suspicious- he kept to himself and had no attachments to others (further support for his paranoia). He had nihilistic delusions- false negativistic views of the world and fellow students. This rage and paranoia may lead to violent behavior that is just as likely to be directed at others as it is to be turned on the self. That is why many psychotic
killers turn the guns on themselves following a mass shooting spree.

There is no mystery here. As much as we can hope that pathology like schizophrenia can be spotted before it can harm the individual or other that is not always feasible. The overarching tragedy is that unlike other societies for the sake of "protecting our freedoms" mentally ill individuals have easy access to weapons that permit them to act out their delusions on a massive scale.

Sincerely,

Joyce E. Myers, MD

Prison Staff Psychiatrist

<i>By Joyce Myers (not verified) at April 19, 2007 - 2:25pm</i>

----

Hmmm...

"Now tell me; do your anecdotes and agendas seem that important now?"

It&#39;s ironic how your arrogant, didactic, self-important writing trivializes your subject matter. If anyone wonders why our school&#39;s ranking isn&#39;t as high as it should be, take a look at Billy McMorris&#39;s columns to see why.

<i>By AlbertN (not verified) at April 19, 2007 - 2:33pm</i>

----

Why blame Charlton Heston?

Yes, why blame Charlton Heston for the Virginia tragedy? One of the most respectable Americans in todays America. He did his best for the country. Serving the nation in World War II. Giving an exemple as a father and grand father. As a professional, always showing that the good should prevail on our lives.

Blame him because he defends the Second Amendment? Doesn&#39;t he has the right to? Or any responsable citizen?
Gun problem, is not on good people, but on bad people. This is the real problem, bad people. This people yes should never be able to get a gun. Unfortunately, it is happening all over the world.
It is not only an American problem, it is a world problem.

<i>By Jaime Pimentel Oliveira (not verified) at April 21, 2007 - 10:00pm</i>


--

Original Source: <a href=http://cornellsun.com/node/22960> Cornell Daily Sun - April 17, 2007 </a>

Billy McMorris

Cornell Daily Sun

2007-07-02

Sara Hood

Jonny Lieberman <jdl46@cornell.edu>, <lieberman.jonny@gmail.com>

eng

Never Again?

<p>Lessons learned on the 8th anniversary of Columbine.

<i>-- Diane Edbril and Daniel Loeb</i>

Yet another American gun massacre, and though the scale is more horrific, it is not surprising. The Virginia Tech massacre is not unlike the Amish schoolhouse shooting in Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania, late last year. Both of these, while unbearably sad, are hardly unexpected in this country. Our weak gun laws make it a certainty that the United States will continue to suffer recurrences of such preventable tragedies. There is a crying need for Americans to understand - It&#39;s about the guns!

Phil Goldsmith, President of CeaseFire PA, said "Since the Columbine shooting tragedy it has become even easier to obtain guns, as well as high capacity ammunition magazines. Many states, including Pennsylvania, have passed pre-emption laws that have undermined the ability of local governments to enact stricter gun laws. (Pennsylvania has preempted local regulation of firearms for over a decade.) Concealed carry laws have multiplied. In addition, for the last six years, the US Department of Justice has required the destruction of gun purchase background check records after just 24 hours, a measure that has prevented a comprehensive review of those who may have acquired guns despite falling into a prohibited category."

Currently:</p>
<p><ul id="obj"><li>Most of our states do not require gun owners to be licensed and for guns to be registered.</li><li>Most of our states have not closed the gun show loophole, so thousands of guns are purchased without background checks.</li><li>Most states impose no limits on the number of firearms one individual can acquire, making it easy for illegal gun traffickers to supply the criminal element.</li><li>Many of our states do not update criminal history databases in a timely manner, making it easy for criminals to obtain firearms.</li></ul></p><p>Imagine how much worse this tragedy could have been if Cho Seung-hui had been in possession of a military assault weapon as is his "right" now that Congress has allowed the Assault Weapons Ban to expire.

Cho Seung-hui was able to obtain firearms despite his psychological record since the burden of proof is on the government to prove that he was a danger to himself and those around him. However, when I get a driver&#39;s license, the burden of proof is on me to prove that my eyesight is adequate and that I understand the rules of the road. When I send my children to school or to summer camp, the burden of proof is on me to show that my children have been immunized and are not carrying any communicable diseases. Why not shift the burden of proof and require a recent attestation of sanity from a psychiatrist or psychologist before anyone can handle a firearm?

Will the American people stand up to the gun lobby and demand change, or will the administration simply blame the media for not concentrating their coverage on the majority of universities which do not have gun violence at any given moment?

As Phil Goldsmith observed: "Congress called for a Moment of Silence in response to this massacre. Indeed, a moment of silence is appropriate for such a devastating tragedy with such pain for families and students. But we also need loud, uncompromising noise, particularly in Pennsylvania, where too many of our citizens are being shot and killed in urban areas. The majority of Pennsylvanians favor sensible handgun laws, including Governor Ed Rendell. It is time for the majority&#39;s voices to be heard loud and clear."

<i>For information about the Stop Gun Violence Through Peace, Action & Education - A Community-Based Interfaith&#39;s Conference on May 20 and the weekly vigils. See last month&#39;s article on <a href="http://www.pjvoice.com/v22/22007guns.aspx">Interfaith Initiative Against Guns</a>.</i>

<b>Liviu Librescu Links:</b></p>
<p><ul id="obj"><li><a href="http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2007/virginiatech.shootings/victims/profiles/liviu.librescu.html">CNN Tribute Page</a></li><li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liviu_Librescu">Wikipedia</a></li><li><a href="http://www.esm.vt.edu/~llibresc/RESUME%20L.%20Librescu.pdf">61 page resume</a></li><li><a href="http://www.chabad.edu/templates/articlecco.html?AID=504498">Family Condolence Page</a></li></ul></p><p>--

© 2007. Permission is hereby granted to redistribute this issue of The Philadelphia Jewish Voice or (unless specified otherwise) any of the articles therein in their full original form provided these same rights are conveyed to the reader and subscription information to The Philadelphia Jewish Voice is provided. Subscribers should be directed to <a href="http://www.pjvoice.com/Subscribe.htm">http://www.pjvoice.com/Subscribe.htm</a>.

Original Source: <a href="http://www.pjvoice.com/v23/23001vatech.aspx">http://www.pjvoice.com/v23/23001vatech.aspx</a></p>

Diane Edbril and Daniel Loeb / The Philadelphia Jewish Voice

2007-07-01

Adriana Seagle

Daniel Loeb (daniel.loeb@verizon.net)

eng

Shooting points to need for less restrictive gun laws

By: Danny Mistarz
Posted: 4/24/07
After the tragic events that took place at Virginia Tech April 16, the anti-Second Amendment crowd has once again reared its ugly head. The usual claims of guns causing violence and the necessity to ban personal ownership have come out. But what if one person, a student, a professor, the RA in the dorm, had been carrying a gun? Would dozens of lives have been spared?

The state of Virginia&#39;s legislature had a bill proposed last year, HB 1572, proposing that handguns be permitted on college campuses for those persons with proper permits and certification. The bill was shot down in subcommittee, never making it to the house floor. At the time, it was celebrated by a VT spokesman as a stride toward continued public safety. Was the wrong decision was made? Guns are used 2.5 million times in self-defense annually, saving approximately 2,575 lives for each life lost annually according to the Second Amendment Foundation; could HB 1572 gave saved thirty-one lives on the morning of April 16, or even just one?

Let&#39;s assume that guns were permitted on campus at Virginia Tech, and that one student or one professor in the engineering building was carrying that day. This coward would never have been able to level a gun on hundreds of his classmates had he known there was the possibility of having to defend himself. What if a student on the hall of the dormitory had a gun, just in the room for protection? Certainly the first two gunshots, would have been heard and within a minute of the start of a rampage, 31 lives could have been saved. All it would take is one person, carrying one gun.

No gun law could stop people who want to get guns from getting them any better than our current drug laws work. Perhaps the gun laws that need arguing against are the gun laws that limit us, not the laws that protect us.

Danny Mistarz

Pratt &#39;09

--

Original Source: <a href=http://www.dukechronicle.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=8436d5a8-6250-459d-b726-78d5453835b3> Duke Chronicle - April 24, 2007</a>

Danny Mistarz

Duke Chronicle

2007-06-24

Sara Hood

David Graham <david.graham@duke.edu>

eng

The Altar of the Gun

<em>Note: I found writing this piece to be a way of channeling my own anger <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/16/AR2007041600533.html?hpid=topnews">at the massacre this morning</a>. But I recognize that anger is only one part of the grief process. Please join me in praying for the families and friends of those killed.</em>

American worships the gun. Today, 33 more were sacrificed on the altar of our devotion to the gun. Specifically to semi automatic handguns. There are already <a href="http://bimmer1200.livejournal.com/20511.html">dozens</a> of <a href="http://instapundit.com/archives2/004221.php">articles</a> from disciples arguing that the massacre today at Virginia tech could have been avoided if some of the students had been carrying guns so they could shoot the killer before he killed them. We trust the gun more than we trust God.

The brutal reality of our gun fetish is that selling guns and ammo is highly profitable. But it is not simply the fact that the market values short term earnings from gun sales more than the social, cultural, political and long term economic damage that gun violence does to our society. More importantly, the gun industry long ago learned to effectively invest their short term earnings into the social, political and cultural sphere. Their investments in the NRA, especially <a href="http://www.vpc.org/nrainfo/chapter2.html">since 1977</a> years have returned 10 fold and the results are a culture in which gun ownership is intimately connected with the values of self-sufficiency, responsibility and security that so many Americans identify with. We&#39;ll call these frontier values.</p>
<p>As much as we&#39;d like to wish that the new Democratic congress would seize on this moment to pass some common sense gun laws, the reality is that many of the new members of Congress were partly by actively courting those with frontier values. Unless their constituency shows signs of disconnecting handguns from frontier values, any vote for limiting the sales of hand guns will be doomed.

It may be that changing our gun culture requires looking at movements that have successfully challenged large corporations with large amounts of cultural capital. The anti-smoking movement comes to mind. The last 30 years have seen a drastic shift on the public perceptions of smoking. The parallels are striking. The right to smoke was once also closely associated with frontier values. The industry also heavily invested in cultural, social and political institutions to maintain and promote the cigarette. For a time it seemed that they were effective. But these days its very hard to find anyone in political office trumpeting the rights of smokers.</p>
<p>What were the tactics and strategies of the anti-smoking lobby? They brought law suits by second hand smokers against big tobacco. Unfortunately a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/20/AR2005102000485.html">law passed in 2005 </a>protects the industry from any parallel suits.

Another tactic of the anti-tobacco movement was its relentless funding of anti-smoking advertising. Through memorable add campaigns they have gradually associated with smoking with disease and decay. It seems this solution has much potential given the brutal reality of gun crime. Is the anti-gun lobby much less well funded? Have they not found the right message?

Of course, part of the anti-smoking victory can be attributed to the scandal of Tobacco companies lying to consumers for many many years. This highlights a major difference between gun industry and the tobacco industry is that gun manufacturers are much less visible in the debate then big tobacco was. The NRA is by far the most visible and powerful gun lobbying organization. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_%26_Wesson#The_Agreement_of_2000">wikipedia article on Smitth & Wesson</a> tells the interesting story of how gun owners turned on the hand that fed them after Smith & Wesson was seen to have compromised on gun control.

But there is hope. In the United Kingdom after the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_Massacre">Dunblane Massacre</a>, more than 700,000 Brits signed the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowdrop_Petition">Snowdrop petition</a> calling for a total ban on the private ownership and use of handguns in the United Kingdom. The petition led to the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 which completely banned handguns in the UK (this was the final in a long series of hand gun control laws) According to a report from the home office, from mid-2005 to mid-2006, only 49 people were killed by handguns (<a href="http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf">Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2005/2006</a>, page 36). This is a rate of roughly 1 per million compared to 55 per million in the US (<a href="http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html">FBI 2004 Crime report)</a>. It turns out that a mandatory five-year jail term for carrying a hand gun does have an effect. I lived in the UK from 2004 through 2006 and noticed that fatal shootings were so rare that they regularly made the national newspaper. People take the hand gun ban for granted and find the gun religion in our country to quaint and strange. On one of my first evenings in the UK I watched a documentary in which a UK reporter went deep into US gun country and interviewed gun disciples. It was like watching an exotic safari.

Change is possible. Massacres like the one at Virginia tech do not need to be a reoccurring horror in our headlines and our lives. Let&#39;s work together to end our worship of the gun.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 16th, 2007 at 6:44 pm by <a href="http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/author/timn/">TimN</a>

--

Original Source: Young Anabaptist Radicals Blog
<a href="http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2007/04/16/the-altar-of-the-gun/">http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2007/04/16/the-altar-of-the-gun/</a>

This work is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 License</a>.

Tim Nafziger

2007-06-17

Brent Jesiek

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5

eng

WCC leader backs calls for effective US firearms regulations

News Brief

By staff writers
18 Apr 2007

World Council of Churches (WCC) general secretary the Rev Dr Samuel Kobia has expressed "deep sorrow" over "this new horror of random violence" that took place at Virginia Tech University on Monday 16 April 2007. To his prayers for the families and the wounded, he added international church concern for more effective regulation of firearms.

"Churches around the world join churches and councils of churches in the US in sending sympathies to those who are suffering, and in upholding parishes in Virginia in their ministry during these difficult days", said Dr Kobia in a statement published yesterday.

Dr Kobia affirmed that "In deference to those who have died and with concern for the future, we all must ask why such killings happen so easily. Why are these incidents repeated as if there are no remedies?

"We are all Virginians in our sympathy, but many people around the world are also Virginians in their vulnerability to the misuse of unregulated guns", Kobia declared.

"Wanton killings", "indiscriminate use of armed force" and "widespread availability of deadly weapons" are features of the Virginia tragedy but are also present daily in Darfur and in Iraq, he said.

Dr Kobia called for "firm and appropriate controls" on the globalized trade in small arms. He notes, among other factors, that the "pro-gun position adopted by the US administration" has been "one of the major obstacles" to progress toward that goal.

The World Council of Churches, which brings together Protestant, Orthodox, Anglican and indigenous churches across the globe, has a longstanding concern for combating violence.

The Decade to Overcome Violence and build a culture of peace has brought together church and civic groups. It has included a &#39;peace to the city&#39; initiative which included action on gun crime and domestic attacks.

--

Original Source: Ekklesia
<a href="http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/5069">http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/5069</a>

This work is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License</a>.

Ekklesia Staff Writers

2007-06-17

Brent Jesiek

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License

eng

P.I.D. Radio 4/22/07: 23, 33, 2121

16 kpbs MP3 6.9 MB

April 22, 2007

What more can be said about the shootings that left 33 dead at Virginia Tech last Monday? About 42 minutes&#39; worth, apparently. We ask questions about a few details that bother us about the tragedy, which include a federal "stand down" order to local police and EMTs, the jamming of local cell phone service, and differing descriptions of the shooter.

We also talk about Wednesday&#39;s shooting on the streets of Columbia, less than a mile from the bunker. What all will come of this?

Well, we expect to hear calls for tighter restrictions on handguns and mandatory mental health screening for elementary school students. Sounds good, but it ultimately means more government control over our lives and our children.

Links:

• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4920">Sources: Feds ordered VA police to stand down</a>
• <a href="http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/WarlockBlue">Cell phones intentionally jammed at Virginia Tech by authorities</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4908">Virginia Tech shooter was autistic: Relative</a>
• <a href="http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/04/plot-hatched-behind-cinder-block-walls.html">Karan Grewal tells CNN&#39;s John King he and others were handcuffed</a>
• <a href="http://derekpgilbert.com/?p=2373">Differing descriptions of VT shooter</a>
• <a href="http://www.peeringintodarkness.com/forum/index.php?topic=4680.0">PID Forum: Cho&#39;s Sister an Intel Asset?</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4825">Is this a picture of &#39;Ismail-AX&#39; (a.k.a. Cho Seung-Hui)?</a>
<i>The original blog post and the photo at Flickr have since been deleted. As far as we know,</i> Connecting the Dots<i> is now the only place you&#39;ll see this picture.</i>
• <a href="http://www.columbiatribune.com/2007/Apr/20070420News003.asp">Columbia shooting suspect had just left jail</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4910">Gunman at NASA</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4913">April: The Cruelest Month?</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4895">Gates says Washington to sell smart bombs to Saudi Arabia</a>
• <a href="http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,132397,00.html?ESRC=topstories.RSS">Air Force fills Army ranks</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4871">Russia plans world&#39;s longest tunnel to link to Alaska</a>
• <a href="http://www.escambray.cu/Eng/Special/Posada%20Carriles-Bush/Cprosecution070416839.htm">Cuba: Posada prosecution in US or extradition to Venezuela</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4924">Fallen Angel</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4840">Pet food contamination: Melamine now found in rice</a>
• <a href="http://peeringintodarkness.com/ctd/?p=4899">Australian officials puzzle over missing yacht crew</a>

--

Original Source: P.I.D. Radio
<a href="http://pidradio.com/?p=357">http://pidradio.com/?p=357</a>

This work is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/">Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License</a>.

P.I.D. Radio

2007-06-16

Brent Jesiek

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License

eng

The tragedy of Virginia Tech is partly a tragedy of bureaucracy

<b>From the Editor</b>

May/June 2007
by <a href="mailto:kathrin.lassila@yale.edu">Kathrin Day Lassila</a> &#39;81

<b>The tragedy of Virginia Tech is partly a tragedy of bureaucracy.</b>

I don&#39;t mean the sort of complaint people usually make about bureaucracy -- too much paperwork and red tape. I mean the opposite. Too few records. Too little discussion and sharing of information. Too few staff, perhaps.

I&#39;m not blaming the state of Virginia or Virginia Tech for failing to stop a determined murderer. But enough bureaucracy, of the right kind, would have given them a chance. The gun salesman would have known Seung-Hui Cho had a history of mental illness and wasn&#39;t entitled to buy guns. The associate dean who told a worried professor last fall that she hadn&#39;t heard of any previous problems would have known about the two complaints to the police and the judge&#39;s ruling that Cho was a danger to himself.

The competing needs for privacy and protection can&#39;t be perfectly balanced.

Colleges and universities serve a vulnerable demographic. Usually, "major mental illness first shows itself somewhere between the ages of 17 to around 25," says Lorraine Siggins, chief psychiatrist at Yale Health Services. Against those rare but terrible events, universities need discreet and careful systems. If a student has trouble and the trouble is resolved, the university has to leave the student alone to live the ordinary turbulent life of a young adult, in privacy, without stigma. But if trouble recurs, the right administrator has to be able to find out fast that this isn&#39;t the first time.

The competing needs for privacy and protection can&#39;t be perfectly balanced. After VT, says Betty Trachtenberg, dean of student affairs at Yale College, university officials everywhere thought, <i>There, but for the grace of God . . .</i>

But it&#39;s easier to have good systems and enough staff at a wealthy, relatively small private institution than a large public institution. Siggins speaks of a "web" of people at Yale who act as a safety net. Medical privacy rules prevent her staff from taking action or sharing information on any patient unless that patient is an immediate "threat to self or others." (She wouldn&#39;t comment on how often that happens and said Health Services doesn&#39;t give out statistics.) Instead, "what most frequently happens is that the person comes to people&#39;s attention in lots of different ways."

The campus police report any incident involving a student to the disciplinary committee and the student&#39;s dean. In Yale College, the 12 residential college deans are the people who, says Trachtenberg, "notice when somebody&#39;s in trouble." In the professional schools, relationships with teachers and fellow students serve this need, as most schools have small student bodies (from 120 art students to 670 law students). The Graduate School has only two associate deans of student affairs for 2,600 students. But Graduate School dean Jon Butler says the 50-plus department directors of graduate studies are the people who call his office when a student is in trouble.

Once the warning flags go up, administrators can, for instance, suspend a student or require the student to seek treatment. In a meeting after the VT massacre, Trachtenberg and the deans of the colleges agreed that Cho&#39;s multiple episodes of stalking and frightening students -- "behavior that is not consistent with living in a community" -- would have triggered action.

Not that they can be certain. "It&#39;s very hard to think that something like this would fall through the cracks" at Yale, says Trachtenberg. "Nevertheless, I am knocking wood as I talk to you."

--

Original Source: <a href="http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/current/editor.html">http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/current/editor.html</a>

Kathrin Day Lassila

2007-06-11

Sara Hood

Permission granted by author Kathrin Lassila, kathrin.lassila@yale.edu

eng

US churches call for gun control following university shootings

News Brief

By staff writers
17 Apr 2007

Expressing the sorrow of many Christians in the US at yesterday&#39;s killings in Virginia, the General Secretary of the National Council of Churches USA (NCC USA) has also renewed the NCC&#39;s call for &#39;meaningful&#39; legislation to prevent gun violence.

"My pastor&#39;s heart breaks for the families of those who died today," said the Rev Dr Bob Edgar following the fatal shooting at Virginia Tech University.

"Faith leaders have spoken up continually about the epidemic of gun violence in our country," Dr Edgar said in a statement. "Despite repeated calls from faith and community leaders to Congress and presidents nothing ever seems to get done to stem the tide."

Dr Edgar, himself a former Member of Congress, lamented that the issue of gun violence seems to get such little attention from those who have the power to do something about it.

"How many more will have to die before we say enough is enough? How many more senseless deaths will have to be counted before we enact meaningful firearms control in this country? How many more of our pastors, rabbis and imams will have to preside over caskets of innocent victims of gun violence because a nation refused to stop the proliferation of these small weapons of mass destruction?," said Dr Edgar.

Edgar pointed to the NCC USA&#39;s 1967 policy calling for firearms control and a March 2000 interfaith campaign calling for an end to the epidemic of gun violence in the nation.

"The escalation of gun violence compels us to call for an end to the manufacture and easy distribution of such instruments of destruction," Edgar said in 2000 and reiterated that statement today.

Edgar invited people of faith and goodwill to send messages of support to a weblog set up by the Virginia Interfaith Center.

The NCC USA is an ecumenical voice of America&#39;s Orthodox, Protestant, Anglican, historic African American and traditional peace churches. These 35 communions have 45 million members in 100,000 congregations in all 50 states.

--

Original Source: Ekklesia
<a href="http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/5059">http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/5059</a>

This work is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License</a>.

Ekklesia Staff Writers

2007-06-10

Brent Jesiek

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 England & Wales License

eng