• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

Chelsea Guetz of Kiowa writes:

I have been reading some of the editorials, columns and letters regarding the Virginia Tech massacre and I can’t help but laugh at what some of these people are thinking.
First of all, the slaying of 32 students on the Virginia Tech campus is not comparable to the Iraq war. Those brave soldiers who are fighting overseas for our country chose to be in the military. Whether the country is at war or not, people who enter the military know what they are getting themselves into. Those students at Virginia Tech had no idea that there was even a possibility they would never leave that building again.
Second, what that gunman did was heinous and sick. Stop trying to blame his actions on the fact that he was bullied in high school. Stop trying to blame his actions on the president of Virginia Tech, or the Blacksburg police force or even the president of the United States. Blame the monster who pulled the trigger!
We were all bullied at some point in our childhood, but that does not make killing 32 people understandable.

READER COMMENTS

He was mentally ill Chelsea, so should we blame him for being insane?

The judge ticked off a box saying that he was in imminent danger of harming himself and others, the lecturers had already submitted several complaints that he was mentally unstable and had violent thoughts, his roommate had also reported him, and the police knew that he was a risk.

Since he hadn't yet committed any crime the police were unable to do anything and state law neither required involuntary hospitalization, nor that his name should be put on the firearms watchlist.

So he was able to purchase firearms even though he was known to be mentally ill, and no way to get him out of his madness.

Laugh away Chelsea, but what do you propose we do about people who are known to be violent and profoundly mentally ill?

Blame them for having faulty brains?

Of course the killer is the one mainly responsible for the killings. But for goodness sakes, shouldn't we look at what might have been done that might have prevented the killings? Of course we should. I don't know how much blame there should be, unless there was a grievous disregard of some kind, but certainly we need to see what might have been done differently, and that requires us to look at what was done and determine if it was sufficient.

One side note. Chelsea says: "people who enter the military know what they are getting themselves into."

Chelsea, if anybody at all knew what we were getting ourselves into, we wouldn't have done things we way we did. People who volunteer for the military have a right to expect out leaders to do a hell of a lot better job than President Bush has done.

Wow! The Nannies didn't protect you from some nutcase. What else is new? Your protection is up to you alone.

Yeah, Yeah. Pass another law. It seems that schools are already gun-free zones, and that murder is already illegal. What more do you think you can do?

How about asking all the Nannies why they didn't blow the whistle on this guy? Why? Because they would have actually had to do what they promised, and deal with a true threat rather than just harrass innocents.

"Laugh away Chelsea, but what do you propose we do about people who are known to be violent and profoundly mentally ill?

Blame them for having faulty brains?
Posted by Bango Skank on May 11, 2007 02:38 PM"

Actually, yes. If their brain is severely short-circuited, they need to be removed from society. Do you have any experience here?

clyde: "Your protection is up to you alone."

No civilized society for this Neanderthal. How's the weather up there in that mountain cabin? While his anarchic views are somewhat similar to that of the killer, we can hope that he has more control of his hate than the killer.

08:45 Let me get this straight, you propose to blame somebody for being insane?
How exactly do you figure they had a choice in whether or not to be insane?

The killer sqeezed off nearly 200 rounds with hand-held, non-automatic firearms. He spent more time reloading than squeezing the trigger. Why wasn't he attacked? Why didn't somebody fight back? Has today's liberal college campus gone so PC that the brainwashed won't even fight to save their own lives?

Had their been some licensed carriers in the VT "gun-free" zone, the killer may have been taken out. I bet there were several national guardsmen, reservists, hunters, vets and even active police officers close to the scene. And if only one had a gun, then the outcome may have been quite different.

You can have all the "gun-free" zones you want. What we need are "killer-free" zones. And the best way to guarantee that is to kill them before they kill you.

The best way to fight anti gun liberals is to join the NRA. 1-877-NRA-2000.Remember Bill Clinton said he lost the House and Senate because of the NRA.It was because he pushed the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapon Ban.Also most Democrats think Al Gore lost to Bush because of the NRA.Gore lost at least 5 states that he should have won because of the NRA.Even if you do not like guns and just want to kick liberal butt join the NRA today.

POST A COMMENT

• 'Kid Nation' reality show a new low
• Rivers a shameful hire
• Too little news
• ‘Diesel’ fumes
• Unlocalized story a disservice to readers
• Riled up by Christian music
• Darling of the left
• Solutions too costly