Realistic Aims

I agree this is the crux of the issue. The problem is there are thousands of kids who write gory poetry, are socially withdrawn, have obsessions with classmates, etc - and are really of no harm to anyone. Cho (who should have stayed in his country of origin where no one has guns) displayed enough disturbing behavior to warrant counseling - and such was given. What, beyond that, could the school have done? Kicking him out of school wouldn't have prevented the shooting - it may even have promoted it. Social acceptance may have turned away his wrath, but it didn't appear he wanted any of that. It's possible a persistently concerned classmate could have become his friend and exerted influence in his life, but that can hardly be the officially promoted response by the university.

I know this may be insensitive of me, but I wonder how he was able to kill an entire class of 30 people. I guess everyone just ran around screaming hoping Cho would off himself before he pointed the gun at them. If the whole classed would have rushed him, there's no way he could have shot them all. Maybe society as a whole needs to be more assertive and able to react in emergency situations.

It's also interesting that if one of the other students was packing heat and was able to effectively wield it, the death count would no doubt have been less.

Lastly, I think someone needs to develop a security system that will instantaneously debilitate everyone in the room/plane/etc and notify the authorities. Electric shock is probably the most obvious way, but maybe some sort of gas could be used. In any case, the system could be triggered by remote... or by the sound of a gunshot... or by screams. Or, there could just be a few big emergency buttons scattered throughout the room. The person pressing them would be debilitated, too, and those doing so without reason could be fined, so I can't picture it being activated as a prank. Is cost the only reason not to implement something like this?

This is exactly what I'm talking about--Guns themselves are not the problem, people are--I stated that in my posting, tho not quite as succinctly.

The shooting in VA has once again thrust Gun Control into the limelight; what I'm searching for is an intelligent means to control Gun Violence (really all violence), while at the same time protect the 2nd Amendment.

As to why students in the classrooms he assaulted did not rush him while was reloading, I can only think of one reason: Fear, most likely of death. For me, the choice is obvious; I personally do not have fear, I know where to turn that over to. Quoting Star Trek II: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." But then, too many of us are more 'self-serving', than are 'serving-selves'.

Brandon's suggestion of 'knock out gas' has merit, but what type of system can we use that will be both safe (we don't want any accidental deaths due to allergies, etc.---think litigation here) and effective. Not only that, but some kind of 'cost effectiveness' (maybe a reduction in the cost of liability insurance?) needs to be built in as well as incentive to businesses, schools, or any other place that would need to install it. There is also delivery system(s), who has the panic button access, and how effective the system is (think Big shopping mall, like Mall of America). Also, what do you do if you have a Tower Sniper, ala Charles Whitman?

Most states have laws 'protecting' the mentally ill. It is difficult to have them placed under care unless one can prove they are a danger to themselves or others. While Cho's writing indicated he was an *extremely* disturbed young man, nothing really could have been done under the law.

Do the laws need to be changed?

Darn, everything I was going to say, guyvia already said.

I agree with the fact that if guns are removed from society, some crazy human will be still be sitting somewhere, brooding in the dark, planning for some other way to wipe a bunch of us out. Timothy McVeigh of Oklahoma Federal Building fame did. The problem with trying to recognize and prevent this behavior is that it is actually so rare in a statistical sense. (Not rare enough though.) I think the same "It can't be happening" mentality applies to the dangerous mental illness diagnosis part of this story also. Even though he presents himself as disturbed, unless he actually is exhibiting dangerous behavior, everyone brushes it off, because to be "pre-accusing" everybody all the time will eventually lead to paranoia on a grand scale. In other words, unless something presents itself in a obvious way, most of us who haven't lived dangerous lives, tend to think the best of any given situation, sometimes to our demise.

Realistic Aims?

I think we should give all our firearms to the poor kids in the ghettos who need them much more than we do.

Well, what do you expect? I am a nerd after all.