'All students should be armed'

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21581323-2,00.html

THE man who sold Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung-Hui a high-powered pistol yesterday said he bore no responsibility for the tragedy.

Instead, gun dealer John Markell blamed the university for the slaughter, saying if guns had not been banned on the campus victims would have been able to defend themselves.

Mr Markell said all his staff could remember about Cho was that he was smartly dressed and had "an easy manner" when he bought a 9mm Glock semi-automatic five weeks ago for $682 after minimal checks under Virginia's loose gun control laws.

His words came as a simmering debate raged in the gun-loving United States, with passionate arguments from both sides.

The US media have branded the 23-year-old mass murderer as a mad loner - but American academics said the shooting required a broader review of US culture.

Johns Hopkins University Sociology Professor Joseph Gasper said there was a culture of violence in the US and many American movies and TV linked it to manhood.

He also said the ready availability of guns made it easier to commit crimes.

"I would urge people to avoid attributing the crime in Virginia to the mental illness of an individual and focus on the myriad social factors that would play a role in this sort of violent crime," Mr Gasper said.

He pointed to social marginalisation, violence in the media and masculinity as among the factors that needed to be examined.

About 40 per cent of American households own a gun. Some 200 million weapons are in private hands there and challenging the constitutional right to bear arms is potentially a hugely unpopular move.

President George W. Bush said while the shooting would inevitably rekindle debate about gun ownership, now was not the time to discuss it.

House Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said in Washington that lawmakers would discuss the extremely sensitive issue but there were no immediate plans for legislation.

Gun lobbyists claimed that the worst mass shooting murder in US history proved guns should be more readily available.

John Velleco of the powerful Gun Owners of America lobby group said a lack of guns among the university staff and students had allowed the massacre to happen.

"It's tragic to mandatorily disarm the citizenry and create these gun-free zones which are, in a sense, you know, giving these deranged madmen easy targets," he said.

Mr Markell took the same stance.

"Students are thrown out if they are found to carry guns on campus and professors are dismissed if they carry them," the 58-year-old gun dealer said.

"If you had responsible folk on that site carrying firearms, this would never have got so out of control.

"He would have been stopped in his tracks."

>>21
point 1:  "gun-free zones" are a fucking failure.  that policy saved zero lives at vtech.  33 people are dead, and your precious campus policies did nothing to prevent it.  it's time to accept the obvious.

Gun-free zones are not about saving lives, it's about creating an atmosphere where you can relax without niggers running around with guns.

point 2:  nobody's advocating handing guns to students, or writing a blank cheque for concealed weapons for everyone.  the fact is that there are many students around the country who have applied for and obtained concealed handgun licenses, and we carry everywhere but on campus.  check the stats on crime committed by these licensed individuals, and tell me they're a threat to anyone but rapists and killers.

The burden of proof is upon you, provide a reliable objective non-amerikan source and I will read it.

point 3:  self-defense is a personal right.  i may be a student, but i am also an adult and a citizen.

No, it is not a right.

point 4:  if you don't think an armed person would have stood a good chance at cutting this massacre short, you're an idiot.  if a psychopath can kill 33 people with a pistol he bought a week prior, you'd better believe that i could manage to score one.

I, for one, would run away instead of trying to become a hero.  Any sane person would likely do the same.

One thing -- if everyone was indeed carrying guns -- intelligent people like Cho would instead have used indirect ways of killing, such as explosives, nerve gas, and so on.  Guns don't protect against those types of crimes (nothing does, except stricter control -- and even then, it's always possible to build something deadly out of normal things).