Shootings At Va. Tech Spark Gun Debate

Two Experts On Opposite Side of The Spectrum Appeared On "The Early Show" To Talk About Gun Policy

(CBS)  The deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history has renewed the debate over gun control.

Advocates of wider gun control blame the recent string of deadly shootings, including the Amish school shooting in October in Pennsylvania, on the availability of guns in the U.S. They say there has been no new legislation on control of guns since the Columbine incident, which occurred eight years ago this week.

But those in the pro-gun camp say that if people are allowed to carry concealed weapons to protect themselves, they can prevent these kinds of tragedies from occurring.

Maggie Rodriguez, who is filling in for The Early Show co-anchor Hannah Storm, moderated a debate between Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and Suzanna Hupp, a former Texas state representative and concealed weapon advocate. Hupp saw her parents gunned down at Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas, in 1991 when George Hennard killed 23 people and wounded 20 others before taking his own life.

"It's been eight years since Columbine," Helmke said via satellite from Washington, D.C. "We've done nothing as a country. It's been six months since the Amish school shootings. We've done nothing as a country. We need to be asking out elected officials what they can do to prevent people from getting these kinds of high-powered weapons."

Hupp said she also believes that this kind of horrific incident is preventable, but she and Helmke disagree about how to do it.

"It amazes me that our politicians don't get the fact that these mass shootings only occur in places where guns aren't allowed," said Hupp, who spoke via satellite from Austin, Texas. "They occur in gun-free zones. Think about it. Columbine, he mentioned — post offices, day care centers, other schools, universities. Why are we removing my teachers' right to protect themselves and the children that are in their care?"

If she had her gun the day her parents were killed, Hupp says she would have been able to make a difference and perhaps save some people.

"There's absolutely no doubt in my mind things would have been different that day," she said. "I believe in this particular scenario, when Virginia Tech apparently stood up in front of a hearing and said they didn't want people to be able to protect themselves on campus, at that point, they had the responsibility and the liability to protect those people and they didn't. You basically are creating a shopping list for a madman. Somebody who wants a high body-bag count goes to a gun-free zone."

Helmke said that Hupp raised legitimate points, but a deeper problem is that many politicians don't even want to open discussion about the problem of guns — whether it is solved by having more control or less.

"Most politicians just run away from this issue," he said. "We need to start asking them what their proposals are … Maybe if you have strict licensing, permitting and registration, maybe you would have more guns.

"Actually, these killings occur all sorts of places. Fairfax, Va., police station, just 11 months ago, had two police officers killed at the police station. We make it too easy to get these guns.

"Let's prevent these folks from getting these guns in the first place. Then we can argue about how best to react when they're coming to the shooting. If they can't get that gun with a high-powered clip that's shooting off that many rounds that quickly, then we're making our whole — our community safer."

But Hupp pointed out that the shooter at Virginia Tech did not have an automatic weapon but rather a semiautomatic, which meant he had to pull the trigger each time he fired. But even if the shooter had used revolvers, Hupp said that people need the ability to protect themselves.

"When you make gun laws like this, it only takes the guns out of the hands of the normal, sane people, if you will," she said. "It keeps them from protecting themselves. None of the mass shootings have occurred in places where guns were allowed. You don't see these things happening at NRA conventions or the dreaded gun show that you all talk about frequently."

But Helmke pointed out that guns, other than the ones being displayed, have been banned from entering gun shows. He said cities, states and countries that have more guns have more violence and that "we need to prevent these people from getting the guns in the first place."

Hupp interjected: "How do you do that?"

"Stop high-capacity clips," Helmke said. "A semiautomatic weapon, you can get off 25 rounds in under 15 seconds — generally if you know what you're doing. It's just a single finger twitch."

Those on his side of the issue have proposed things like assault weapons bans and background checks, mostly to no avail, Helmke said. In Virginia, he said, people don't even have to go through a background check if they are buying from a non-licensed dealer or non-licensed seller at the gun show.

"Do an assault weapons ban ... Ban these high velocity clips," Helmke said. "Stop multiple sales of handguns. Look at registration licensing. There's a lot of things. But nobody has done anything."

But Hupp said she doesn't think guns can effectively be kept out of the hands of people who want to do harm. That is why people should be allowed to protect themselves.

"You cannot name me one place where a mass shooting has occurred where it wasn't in a gun-free zone," Hupp said. "I want my children protected. I want my teachers to be able to protect themselves."

[rcweide]

There is so little common sense in the Gun Control Group. It always takes a finger on the trigger to fire a gun. For the information that John Edwards espoused, If more of the students and/or instructors had a weapon, they could have stopped this Cho in his tracks, saving lives. It appears that these academia are so wrapped up in themselves that they don't know what the world is about.

[jmagarotz]

Semi-automatics are meant to kill people. Why do you need this? For self-defence? Grow up and stop thinking that guns and violence make you any more masculine, and start trying to work for real peace.
Posted by ttinsly at 12:46 PM : Apr 18, 2007

You seem to think (?) that Semi autos are a recent invention. The design is over 100 years old. The old saw "made to kill people" could apply to baseball bats, and knives too. In my experience, your comments about "masculinity" show you are not quite sure of your own. It would be adviseable for you to argue on a subject where you have some knowlege as you're getting whupped on this one. My advice is grow up and realize you can't make a Utopia with laws. It's a real world out there and if you want to remain a sheep so be it. Me? I'll be a sheep dog.

[phoenix1218]

mikealford3,
I actually agree with you that a person should be a citizen, not just hold a greencard, in order to be able to carry a weapon. And having my LTC myself I wouldn't think it would be a bad idea for people to be checked by a shrink before they are able to buy a weapon. I also agree that people should stop bringing up things that happened over 200 years ago.

[wiccantexan]

kindrox, well-spoken! Glad to have you here in Texas.

[kindrox]

Self defense is Wild West and Barbaric? Does the moral superiority of dying at the hands another, when you could have saved your own life, make you warm and happy inside?

I have a request for you: DON%u2019T COME. We don%u2019t need you, we are getting along just fine in the South, thank you very much. We don%u2019t need more useless boobs who cannot look after themselves, let alone be useful to anyone else.

The fact is I trust and have more faith in other people than you do. I trust criminals to act badly no matter what law we pass.

And I trust and have faith that the vast majority of people, if armed, will conduct themselves in good fashion. See there is the rub for you. I am just fine walking around on the streets of Texas knowing that passersby probably have guns. Their motives and what they might do if I accidentally step on the toe of another does not concern me at all.

I don%u2019t believe that I could make the upstanding citizens of Texas shoot me, short of my becoming a criminal.

Notice it is you that don%u2019t trust. You don%u2019t trust your fellow man. You must believe that most people, if they had a gun, would look for excuses to harm you. You should examine your own deep seated mistrust of other people.

[wiccantexan]

I feel VERY SAFE because there are essentially no guns here. Robbers use knives. I don't ever hear gunshots. I feel safer. I feel happier, and so I trust others around me more. Why is America so afraid? And why does she prefer guns over life?
Posted by ttinsly at 09:56 AM : Apr 18, 2007

So, people get murdered quieter where you are? We prefer guns to PRESERVE our life. Don't get the idea confused with some idealistic view.

[sandieangel]

FIRST OF ALL, MY THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE WITH ALL OF THOSE AFFECTED BY THE HORRIBLE TRAGEDY AT VA TECH. DEFENDING OURSELVES FROM AN ATTACK THAT MOST LIKELY WILL NEVER HAPPEN IS A PRETTY WEAK ARGUMENT FOR CARRYING A DEADLY WEAPON. TRUTH IS, WE ALREADY HAVE A DEFENSE IN THESE SITUATIONS IF WE CAN TRAIN OURSELVES TO USE OUR NATURAL ADVANTAGE IN NUMBERS. WE NEED TO AGREE AS A SOCIETY THAT THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR IS UNACCEPTABLE. THIS IS AN ACTION, NOT A PHILOSOPHY. IF WE WORK TOGETHER WE CAN DIFFUSE A SHOOTING SITUATION QUICKLY, PRESERVING THE LIFE OF OTHERS AS WELL AS POSSIBLY THE SHOOTER WHO WOULD THEN HAVE TO LOOK IN THE EYES OF THOSE HE WANTED TO HARM. THIS IN ITSELF WOULD BE MORE OF A DETERRENT THAN BEING KILLED SINCE INVARIABLY THESE PEOPLE TAKE THEIR OWN LIVES BEFORE THEY CAN BE APPREHENDED. WHAT IF EVERYONE IN SIGHT OF THE SHOOTING RAN TOWARD THE KILLER INSTEAD OF AWAY. IT IS NATURAL INSTINCT TO RUN AWAY, BUT WHAT IF WE TRAINED OURSELVES AS A SOCIETY TO DO THE OPPOSITE? I AM NOT SAYING ANYTHING AGAINST THE COURAGEOUS STUDENTS AT VA TECH, THERE HAS BEEN SOME TREMENDOUS STORIES OF BRAVERY. WE DO NOT NEED MORE GUNS, WE NEED TO REALIZE THAT WHEN SOMEONE ELSE IS USING A GUN, THAT WE WOULD BE HARDER TARGETS RUNNING TOWARD THEM THAN UNSUCCEFULLY HIDING FROM THEM. WE ARE AMERICANS, WE ARE NOT VICTIMS. WE DO NOT GIVE IN TO TERROR. WE LEARN FROM OUR EXPERIENCE. THAT IS WHY WE ARE THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH.

[scsocal]

People kill people not guns! Criminals and others
bent on killing can always buy anything they want
on the blackmarket!! We should have laws so that
non-citizens can't buy or carry guns. Most people arrested in the U.S. are illegals who have guns and are commiting crimes. There will
always be disturbed individuals like this Korean
student among us. Maybe we shouldn't be so politicaly correct and be able to safely turn
in individuals to authorities without worrying
about being sued or centured. This individual
was disturbed and should have been monitured
more closely especially since they had been
having bomb threats for the past few weeks prior
to him killing these students!!
We don't need the gun control crowd preaching to
us and trying to pass gun control laws now in the
aftermath of this event!!

[kindrox]

ALL gun purchases from dealers require a background check. What point is a waiting period? What point is registration? Canada tried it and is getting rid of it because of the expense and uselessness of it. What point is regulation if criminals ignore laws?

As for bans on semiautomatics, ask the police to get rid of theirs too. How are you going to defend yourself with a bolt action pistol??????

Communities don%u2019t have rights, individuals do. Do you listen to yourself? -EVERYONE CAN HAVE A WILD-WEST SHOOT OUT AND PROTECT THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY-

The alternative is NO LAW ABIDING CITIZEN CAN DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST CRIMINALS THAT IGNORED THE LAW AND ARMED THEMSELVES.

Have you been to the US? Do you really think ordinary citizens are having shootouts over shoplifting, or what ever minor issues come and go every day? Did you see my post one page over where men and women used guns to defend their lives??????????

Come to my street, half the home owners have guns. Kids are safe to play on the streets without being watched, burglary is rare, the neighborhood is free of gangs and thugs. And I live in a big city, and no we don%u2019t have fancy gates or private gaurds.

Police force, who are you kidding anyway? This guy killed 32 people and then himself long before any cops came around to do anything. Do you know any cops? Ask them how many times they responded in time to save a life, versus how many times they come to clean up the crime scene.

[mikealford3]

Phoenix, I understand and you are correct, forgive me. I just think a greencard is not enough to allow a person to buy a firearm. Citizenship is needed to gain access to all of the rights as an American.

As for other countries being more peaceful, I wonder if those peaceful countries have the racial and economic and cultural diversity that we have in America. As has been shown in the last few weeks the U.S. has so much hatred with regard to racial issues. Perhaps starting if the adults could learn how to live together in the present, rather than bring up things from 200 years ago, we could teach the next generation not to hate one another so much.

[kindrox]

Ttinsly,

How much is the FEELING of safety worth, versus say, actual safety? I am not sure what European country you are in right now, but I bet you are within 100-1000 meters of a gun right now. Shooting sports are big in Ireland, France, Denmark, Finland, Norway, well just about all of Western Europe. You are just not aware of what is actually around you, so you feel safe. Would you feel less safe to know some of your neighbors had guns?

I feel safe myself, as there has only been one burglary in my neighborhood the last year and no violent crimes. In my city there is the occasional murder but its few and far between. I also have more than a feeling of safety, I have the means to INSURE my safety should the need arise.

[mark-tx]

The debate about guns misses the point. How do you legislate morality? The simple fact is there were many warning signs about this shooter and all others who have done such things. The fact remains that there are people who will kill even if all firearms are banned. What do you do about them? And by the way, I don't care what weapon a criminal uses, gun, knife, bat, rock, etc.., they are still criminals.

[kindrox]

Part I/II

USABrit,

I don%u2019t know if I would believe official statistics from England.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=6059

It seems the Brits are massaging the numbers to appear safer. According to the article:
For example, where a series of homes were burgled, they were regularly recorded as one crime. If a burglar hit 15 or 20 flats, only one crime was added to the statistics.

If you look at your 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary charges Britain's 43 police departments with systemic under-classification of crime %u2013 for example, by recording burglary as "vandalism." The report lays much of the blame on the police's desire to avoid the extra paperwork associated with more serious crimes.

Britain's justice officials have also kept crime totals down by being careful about what to count.

"American homicide rates are based on initial data, but British homicide rates are based on the final disposition." Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. "With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham," the report concludes.

[bbailey642]

For folks that that don't own a gun and want to have all of the guns taken away: post your name and address with a big sign in your town saying "My residence is a gun free zone". Having not even fired a gun since leaving the military nearly 20 years ago, I do own a 5 shot .38 and a shotgun (my arsenal). Neither one has ever been fired and are only handled for periodic cleaning. Both are locked in fireproof safes. The pistol is handy enough for self protection at home where only my wife and I have access and knowledge of location. I'm a Benefactor Member of the NRA and if this makes me a "gun nut" so be it. Do I believe in the Second Amendment as vocalized by the NRA? You bet! Do I believe you need a fully automatic AK-47? NO! Just common sense. That South-Korean fellow bought his weapons over a month before this horrible trajedy occurred. So, he planned his actions well ahead of time (think about the chains for the doors). He was going to do something and chose guns as his weapon of choice. If he didn't have access to them, he would have chosen another means. There probably would have been less casualties, but he would have done something just the same. I say we have thousands of gun laws already, both local and federal. How about if the Brady Center worked at spending their billionaire-contributed dollars on enforcing the already-enacted laws along with the improvement of our existing means of doing so and the hiring of more law enforcement personnel.

[kindrox]

Part II/II

Another "common practice," according to one retired Scotland Yard senior officer, is "falsifying clear-up rates by gaining false confessions from criminals already in prison." (Britain has far fewer protections against abusive police interrogations than does the United States.) As a result, thousands of crimes in Great Britain have been "solved" by bribing or coercing prisoners to confess to crimes they never committed.

Considering all the data massaging going on over there, I think a better statistic to look at is the overall violence, something harder to sweep under the rug. And in this measurement of crime, crime is UP!
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page66.asp

As far as the number of police go, can you ever have enough? Aren%u2019t most criminals smart enough to wait until no cops are around to commit crime?

[phoenix1218]

"...Sadly there is nothing about this tragedy that is lawful. A foreign national was allowed to purchace a weapon, not legal. He was also allowed to purchase a second gun within a few weeks and clips for those weapons that exceed most state's regulations, not legal..."
Posted by mikealford3 at 06:52 PM : Apr 17, 2007
----------------------------------------
He came to this country when he was 8 years old. He had a greencard. He was legally able to buy, own, and carry a weapon.

[mikealford3]

I firmly believe I should be allowed to own my firearms and agree that in order for someone to take them, "they will pry them from my cold dead hands". Having said that, I also agree to tighter gun laws. I agree we need better laws, such that a 23 yr. old Korean cannot just walk into a gun shop and within 20 minutes walk out with a pistol. For me in N.C. to legally obtain a handgun, I must apply for a permit at the local Sherriff's office. They do the background check and if all is good, within a few weeks they issue the permit.

To compare the U.S. to England or any other country is wrong. Fact is if those countries were so wonderful, why do their people come here?

You can have tough gun control law all you want but I tell you people will have a way to get them anyway.But real issue come from the heart. and that where you need to look at.

[usbrit-2009]

Kindrox

Thanks for the references. The first one is indeed chilling. My folks still live in the UK and they tell me knife violence is at almost epidemic proportions. For some reason a faction of young Britons has always had what we call a "yob" mentality (see soccer violence over the years). The violence level involved tends to increase with time, however, the lack of availablilty of AK-47's and the like lead to more "simple" 1 on 1 fights rather than drive by shootings for example. My belief is that the rise in crime is more due to lack of proper policing than anything else. My home town with a population of over 50,000 has around 5 policeman per shift on duty.
The second refernce is also interesting. Page 40, however, does rather prove my point. There were only 765 homicides total in the UK last year and that number has been dropping for the last 4 years.

[kindrox]

The United States Supreme Court does not believe the State has an actual obligation to protect you:
"There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered." (Bowers v. DeVito)

What does Jesus think? Many people only know this verse:
"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also." Matthew 5:38-39

But this verse is related to conduct in response to insults. Clearly Jesus would not approve of responding to an insult with violence. But what does Jesus say about more serious threats to our security?

"When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.%u201D Luke 11:21

"If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.%u201D Exodus 22:2

"He who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a sack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one" (Luke 22:36).

"But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever" (1 Tim. 5:8).

Those who built on the wall, and those who carried burdens loaded themselves so that with one hand they worked at construction, and with the other held a weapon. Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built (Nehemiah 4:17-18).