If I had my computer functioning this would have been posted this afternoon...
My condolances to the families, friends, and community at Virginia Tech. I don't have any words that people haven't already said, and the service-thing they had today was lovely and sad and hopeful. I was glad to see the President there... Whatever else he's doing wrong, I was glad to see him there in the front row. Those students and facutly deserved that much to say the least.
But
To the two people who decided that today was the appropriate day to point to Islam, and the person who felt the need to defend the "right to bear arms":
How dare you? How dare you use such an awful tragedy as a platform for your misbegotten messages? The dead haven't been buried yet, the wounded are still in the hospital. It's the next fucking day, you self centered self righteous pricks. Haven't you any respect? Haven't you a figment of sympathy? While you sit at your keyboards and tout your pompous idealogies, there are people *broken* in our nation in the most significant way. Have you even stopped to consider what you're going to put any of the other students or faculty that read your pitiful comments through?
As for the first two... I bet you're so damn proud of yourselves for connecting the dots. While Ismail may be a predominantly Islamic name, that doesn't make a Korean (whose father nation in which Islam doesn't even rank an individual percentage) Islamic. NEVERMIND the fact that you're pointing to an entire religion as responsible for the atrocities of a few, did you catch the part where Cho was an English major? His note, which does NOTHING to indicate a religious perspective whatsoever, echoes sentiments from Tom Wolfe's last book. Will you blame him for this as well? What if this Ismail was a character from his reportedly disturbed creative writing papers? Instead of googling for the results you want, why don't you take a peek at FBI profiling, which would tend to indicate he was (I believe this is the term) an organized spree killer? You're nothing but a hate monger, perpetuating misplaced anger and fear.
On that note, to the guns rights activist... You're right. A gun, in and of itself, doesn't kill people. But lax gun control legislation (a lapsed ban no less) put two semi-automatics and amunition in the hands of a man who was emotionally if not psychologically disturbed. Had it been a revolver instead, when he had to stop to reload more people could have escaped, or perhaps done something to stop him. There was no chance against two semi-automaitcs, not a breath. And what grand purpose could those guns have, except to kill people? What if he hadn't had access to guns at all? Would those 33 people - sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, fathers - be dead? And way to go suggesting that the faculty carry firearms. Maybe there'd be a higher death toll, instead of your eternally optimistic ideal that they woud have stopped him. But yes, you're right. A pair of guns and god alone knows how many bullets didn't kill people. If you take the second ammendment out of context, people do have the right to own guns.
But instead of sitting safe and snug at home in Florida, why don't you get off your ass and drive to Virginia. You look in the eyes of the grieving and you tell them to their faces that a sick man like Cho had every right to own those guns. You tell that to the man that fainted at the service today. You go to the hospital and explain this to the people that watched their friends die and but for the grace of God might have been dead themselves. I'm sure plenty of people will weigh in on the topic, but hooray for you, you were the first asshole to take a stand on it. And lest you forget, the Israeli professor who sacrificed himself to help his students escape was unarmed. The RA that initially tried to calm Cho down was unarmed.
How dare you? It hasn't even been a day. Have you no tears? Are you so arrogant that you go untouched? For shame...
End rant. Time for the Daily Show, and a little bit of smiling...
But
To the two people who decided that today was the appropriate day to point to Islam, and the person who felt the need to defend the "right to bear arms":
How dare you? How dare you use such an awful tragedy as a platform for your misbegotten messages? The dead haven't been buried yet, the wounded are still in the hospital. It's the next fucking day, you self centered self righteous pricks. Haven't you any respect? Haven't you a figment of sympathy? While you sit at your keyboards and tout your pompous idealogies, there are people *broken* in our nation in the most significant way. Have you even stopped to consider what you're going to put any of the other students or faculty that read your pitiful comments through?
As for the first two... I bet you're so damn proud of yourselves for connecting the dots. While Ismail may be a predominantly Islamic name, that doesn't make a Korean (whose father nation in which Islam doesn't even rank an individual percentage) Islamic. NEVERMIND the fact that you're pointing to an entire religion as responsible for the atrocities of a few, did you catch the part where Cho was an English major? His note, which does NOTHING to indicate a religious perspective whatsoever, echoes sentiments from Tom Wolfe's last book. Will you blame him for this as well? What if this Ismail was a character from his reportedly disturbed creative writing papers? Instead of googling for the results you want, why don't you take a peek at FBI profiling, which would tend to indicate he was (I believe this is the term) an organized spree killer? You're nothing but a hate monger, perpetuating misplaced anger and fear.
On that note, to the guns rights activist... You're right. A gun, in and of itself, doesn't kill people. But lax gun control legislation (a lapsed ban no less) put two semi-automatics and amunition in the hands of a man who was emotionally if not psychologically disturbed. Had it been a revolver instead, when he had to stop to reload more people could have escaped, or perhaps done something to stop him. There was no chance against two semi-automaitcs, not a breath. And what grand purpose could those guns have, except to kill people? What if he hadn't had access to guns at all? Would those 33 people - sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, fathers - be dead? And way to go suggesting that the faculty carry firearms. Maybe there'd be a higher death toll, instead of your eternally optimistic ideal that they woud have stopped him. But yes, you're right. A pair of guns and god alone knows how many bullets didn't kill people. If you take the second ammendment out of context, people do have the right to own guns.
But instead of sitting safe and snug at home in Florida, why don't you get off your ass and drive to Virginia. You look in the eyes of the grieving and you tell them to their faces that a sick man like Cho had every right to own those guns. You tell that to the man that fainted at the service today. You go to the hospital and explain this to the people that watched their friends die and but for the grace of God might have been dead themselves. I'm sure plenty of people will weigh in on the topic, but hooray for you, you were the first asshole to take a stand on it. And lest you forget, the Israeli professor who sacrificed himself to help his students escape was unarmed. The RA that initially tried to calm Cho down was unarmed.
How dare you? It hasn't even been a day. Have you no tears? Are you so arrogant that you go untouched? For shame...
End rant. Time for the Daily Show, and a little bit of smiling...