Virginia Tech Massacre

Started by mahlertitan, April 17, 2007, 04:16:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

greg

Quote from: carlos on April 20, 2007, 04:01:48 PM
And what happen with the spanish lessons? I'm ready
to renounce to my fee, and give it free of charge.
no te voy a pagar nada, dawg! es cierto
pero sí que estoy agradecido  8)

knight66

I quote myself...anyone got any helpful information for me please?

As the USA is federal, can specific States make their own laws ro restrict the kind of weapons citizens can own? Obviously here I am thinking of the semi automatic weapons. I don't understand why they are allowed unless there are specific reasons that people would need them. I gather some States have different rules from others about how easy it is to get a gun: but do any take it further than that? Or does the constitution prevent them from the kind of restriction I have asked about?

Mike
DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

knight66

Thank you...so there is nothing to stop States moving to some extent on the issue without a change to the constitution.

Mike
DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

Michel

Quote from: knight on April 20, 2007, 10:45:14 PM
Thank you...so there is nothing to stop States moving to some extent on the issue without a change to the constitution.

Mike

Yes, like the death penalty did.

greg

Quote from: knight on April 20, 2007, 10:35:50 PM
I quote myself...anyone got any helpful information for me please?

As the USA is federal, can specific States make their own laws ro restrict the kind of weapons citizens can own? Obviously here I am thinking of the semi automatic weapons. I don't understand why they are allowed unless there are specific reasons that people would need them. I gather some States have different rules from others about how easy it is to get a gun: but do any take it further than that? Or does the constitution prevent them from the kind of restriction I have asked about?

Mike
ha, yeah, it's a different world out here- every state for himself  8)

Mayfielder

Quote from: CS on April 19, 2007, 07:50:10 PM
The gunman lived in America for most of his life, and according to some recent articles surfacing about the bullying he received from peers in high school, it seems his social and psychological problems, if not started here, certainly developed here. And him being Korean is pretty irrelevant. It's not as if he came over to America last week and started killing Americans. Further, he wasn't racially motivated, and neither did he even show nationalistic tendencies. This was a severely troubled young man who grew up in America, and there's no need to bring race or nationality into the matter. I might add that the Korean government wanting to come over and apologize was completely unnecessary.
I didn't bring nationality into this matter - other posters to this thread did when they made the unfathomably stupid statement that Americans are violent and gun-loving, and citing Virginia Tech as an example. I was just responding to this by pointing out that the gunman was not American, but Korean. And with regard to your statement that his being Korean is "pretty irrelevant" then the fact that the crime was perpetrated on American soil is pretty irrelevant as well. You can't have it both ways. 

MishaK

Quote from: knight on April 20, 2007, 10:35:50 PM
I quote myself...anyone got any helpful information for me please?

As the USA is federal, can specific States make their own laws ro restrict the kind of weapons citizens can own? Obviously here I am thinking of the semi automatic weapons. I don't understand why they are allowed unless there are specific reasons that people would need them. I gather some States have different rules from others about how easy it is to get a gun: but do any take it further than that? Or does the constitution prevent them from the kind of restriction I have asked about?

Mike

Knight, did you not read my response to you above?

Quote
State law is unconstitutional if it either violates specific provisions of the federal constitution (which trumps state law via the Supermacy Clause) or if it is found to infringe upon a legal area that has been preempted by the federal branch. One such area would be the regulation of interstate commerce which is specifically reserved to the federal government. Insofar as state law regulating weapons were to be interpreted as infringing upon interstate commerce in weapons, it could be struck down as unconstitutional. Even if it were to pass muster (and many states have very restrictive gun control laws), they are in most cases not worth the paper they are written on since the states cannot police their borders and prevent the importation of weapons from less restrictive states. E.g. Washington DC has very restrictive gun control laws, but Virginia next door is very liberal. So people go and get their guns in Virginia and the DC law is a paper tiger.

knight66

Mench, I am really sorry, I must have scrolled past your post, I had been hoping you would be one of the ones to respond, thanks. I can see there is a real difficulty in making the law stick.

Cheers,

Mike
DavidW: Yeah Mike doesn't get angry, he gets even.
I wasted time: and time wasted me.

cx

Quote from: Mayfielder on April 21, 2007, 08:32:47 AM
I didn't bring nationality into this matter - other posters to this thread did when they made the unfathomably stupid statement that Americans are violent and gun-loving, and citing Virginia Tech as an example. I was just responding to this by pointing out that the gunman was not American, but Korean.
The statement "that Americans are violent and gun-loving, and citing Virginia Tech as an example" is idiotic, I agree, but I don't see how him being Korean is contrary to it. He grew up largely in America and lived in American culture.

QuoteAnd with regard to your statement that his being Korean is "pretty irrelevant" then the fact that the crime was perpetrated on American soil is pretty irrelevant as well. You can't have it both ways.

I don't see why not. The idea that you must accept both (1) a correlation between nationality or race and shooting rampages and (2) a correlation between shooting rampages and locations, without being able to admit the possibility of one or the other being false, is a logical fallacy. So, yes, I can have it "both" ways. But feel free to explain your reasoning, as I don't see any of it.

-CS

greg

Quote from: Mayfielder on April 21, 2007, 08:32:47 AM
I was just responding to this by pointing out that the gunman was not American, but Korean. And with regard to your statement that his being Korean is "pretty irrelevant" then the fact that the crime was perpetrated on American soil is pretty irrelevant as well. You can't have it both ways. 
the guy was more American than Korean. He still had somewhat of an accent, but he's obviously American. (if you've read his plays, you can see he definetely doesn't struggle with foul language)  :P

[quote author = CS]I don't see why not. The idea that you must accept both (1) a correlation between nationality or race and shooting rampages and (2) a correlation between shooting rampages and locations, without being able to admit the possibility of one or the other being false, is a logical fallacy. So, yes, I can have it "both" ways. But feel free to explain your reasoning, as I don't see any of it.[/quote]
well, as i said before, you're more likely to have a troubled white guy or Asian guy who is antisocial to do a shooting spree than someone from the hood (their style is drive-by shootings or just plain murders)
so there is some type of correlation.... though i think my point is different entirely....

PerfectWagnerite

Quote from: greg on April 22, 2007, 11:50:29 AM
the guy was more American than Korean. He still had somewhat of an accent, but he's obviously you're more likely to have a troubled white guy or Asian guy who is antisocial to do a shooting spree than someone from the hood (their style is drive-by shootings or just plain murders)


Well, as someone who grew up in the 'hood so to speak I think in general Brothers are very social (how many single person gangs do you see?). Dealing drugs, pimping, drive-by shootings and carrying out armed robberies usually require more than one person.

greg

Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on April 22, 2007, 12:14:09 PM
Well, as someone who grew up in the 'hood so to speak I think in general Brothers are very social (how many single person gangs do you see?). Dealing drugs, pimping, drive-by shootings and carrying out armed robberies usually require more than one person.
must suck to grow up in the hood, huh?
probably in less than 10 years, where i used to live (and basically, grew up) will be a complete ghetto the way it's going, that's one of the reasons my family (and me with them) moved out a bit.

so you're saying all the crime was involving more than one person? like if you get carjacked, there's two people?

PerfectWagnerite

Quote from: greg on April 22, 2007, 12:29:42 PM
must suck to grow up in the hood, huh?
probably in less than 10 years, where i used to live (and basically, grew up) will be a complete ghetto the way it's going, that's one of the reasons my family (and me with them) moved out a bit.

so you're saying all the crime was involving more than one person? like if you get carjacked, there's two people?

Not all, but most. One person to commit the crime and one to stand watch for the cops.

Well I moved out of the 'hood after college, but my parents like living there...

Harvested Sorrow

Quote from: greg on April 22, 2007, 12:29:42 PM
must suck to grow up in the hood, huh?
probably in less than 10 years, where i used to live (and basically, grew up) will be a complete ghetto the way it's going, that's one of the reasons my family (and me with them) moved out a bit.

Could be worse.  The town where my father grew up has turned into one large ghetto.  Not a section of it...the entire town.

PerfectWagnerite

Quote from: Harvested Sorrow on April 22, 2007, 01:50:45 PM
Could be worse.  The town where my father grew up has turned into one large ghetto.  Not a section of it...the entire town.

Where would that be? St. Louis or New Orleans?

Haffner

Quote from: PerfectWagnerite on April 22, 2007, 02:11:07 PM
Where would that be? St. Louis or New Orleans?




Portland. Maine (just kidding).

greg

Quote from: Harvested Sorrow on April 22, 2007, 01:50:45 PM
Could be worse.  The town where my father grew up has turned into one large ghetto.  Not a section of it...the entire town.
i wonder if there ever has been a ghetto that's eventually turned into a fancy, upper-class neighborhood  :o

MishaK

Quote from: greg on April 23, 2007, 03:41:05 PM
i wonder if there ever has been a ghetto that's eventually turned into a fancy, upper-class neighborhood  :o

Upper West Side, parts of Brooklyn, several neighborhoods in Chicago, etc. Really, as of late, gentrification has quite considerably changed American urban landscapes. Consider that the ganag wars of West Side Story were set where today Linconln Center is located.Rents are ridiculous around there. There are several Trump-owned condo buildings around there.

greg

Quote from: O Mensch on April 23, 2007, 03:44:35 PM
Upper West Side, parts of Brooklyn, several neighborhoods in Chicago, etc. Really, as of late, gentrification has quite considerably changed American urban landscapes. Consider that the ganag wars of West Side Story were set where today Linconln Center is located.Rents are ridiculous around there. There are several Trump-owned condo buildings around there.
really? that good news  8)

MishaK

Quote from: greg on April 24, 2007, 10:39:32 AM
really? that good news  8)

If you consider rent for a studio at $1,900/month good news, then yes...