Resize 
Eric Thompson, the gun dealer who sold firearms and accessories to both Seung-Hui Cho and Phillip Kazmierczak, the gunman who killed five students at Northern Illinois University, came to Virginia Tech last night out of what he feels is his personal responsibility to the community nearly one year after Cho committed the largest school shooting in American history.
In a statement on Wednesday, university spokesman Larry Hincker, called the visit "terribly offensive."
"The organizers appear to be incredibly insensitive to the families of the victims who lost loved ones and to the injured students still recovering from this horrendous tragedy," said the statement issued by Hincker.
Cho bought a .22-caliber handgun through Thompson's Web site based in Green Bay, Wis. Thompson bought accessories through another company site.
Being that just last week we honored the one-year anniversary of last April's shootings on our campus, Thompson's visit is untimely and inappropriate. While Thompson told WBAY-TV in Green Bay this week that, "what I'm really hoping to do (during the visit) is just lend a voice. Unfortunately, a set of coincidences and circumstances, I've been in the media, and I think with that I have a special responsibility to help out."
There is little place for him on campus.
Last night, all he did was perpetuate the situation and rile up the student masses that have taken sides on this increasingly controversial issue.
Coming to Tech was just uncalled for, especially given his history. Everyone for concealed carry argues that as long as guns don't get into the wrong hands, it's fine.
Well, Thompson sold the gun and accessories into the wrong hands. Given that there are currently students on campus who were struck with bullets from Cho's gun and survived, we feel that he had little explanation to offer our community at this point in time.
Even if he followed all the proper procedures and required background checks in selling his guns, he must feel some sort of responsibility for the shootings on both campuses.
Last night's visit was tacky and came across as an attempt just to get attention.
Thompson also announced that he will sell firearms at reduced prices to college students who might be on a tight budget.
Students will have over 5,400 to choose from. This offer is not what the community wants or needs right now, nor was his campus visit.
The editorial board is composed of Amie Steele, Joe Kendall, Saira Haider, Laurel Colella and Sara Mitchell.
Leave a comment 54 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
By submitting your comment, you agree that it will not:
Comments that violate these guidelines will be moderated by the public editor and will then be buried in the comments section.
Eric Thompson did follow all proper procedures. Guns purchased online are shipped to a Federal Firearms License (FFL) dealer who then performs a background check before the customer may take ownership of the weapon. The reason Cho was able to purchase his weapons was due to a loophole in Virginia's laws regarding what information is reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. (Involuntary outpatient vs. inpatient mental health treatment.)
Reply to this Top
So this guy should close up shop because a couple loons bought guns from him? That's a bogus argument - it's like saying that General Motors ought to close up shop when someone gets hit by a car. The whole idea of his visit was specifically to be provocative - it is dangerous to allow the discussion on gun control to be dictate purely by people who assert that only the victims of gun violence ought to have a voice. You can't ever control how people will respond to a given event - and this gentleman wasn't brought here to incite riots, he was brought here to offer an alternative viewpoint on an important discussion. The fact that people were offended isn't actually relevant in any way at all.
Reply to this Top
"Even if he followed all the proper procedures and required background checks in selling his guns, he must feel some sort of responsibility for the shootings on both campuses." Why should he feel some sort of responsibility? He followed all applicable state and federal laws. Should the U.S. fork manufacturers feel some sort of responsibility for Rosy O'Donnel being fat? Whatever happened to people being accountable for their own actions?
Reply to this Top
Thompson did nothing wrong, and it is interesting to hear how he is dealing with the unfortunate fact that he sold gear legally to people who ultimately used it to do evil. I don't understand the notion that "coming to Tech was just uncalled for, especially given his history." What history? A history of doing nothing wrong? As I understand it, his purpose wasn't to explain himself, but rather to lend his perspective in the wake of his unfortunate linkage to these events.
Reply to this Top
I'm curious as to whether or not any members of the editorial board actually attended Mr. Thompson's visit. If they did, I think they would see that he was a very reasonable person, concerned about the facts that even though a gun dealer follows all applicable laws, there are still cracks in the system. The editors would know that Mr. Thompson is upset that we have thousands of laws regulating firearm sales, possession, and usage, yet they go unenforced by the lawmakers who throw the laws into place. His visit did not "rile up student masses", as is evident by the fact that last night's meeting was exceptionally peaceful. The editorial board is certainly entitled to its opinion, as is anyone else, but I hope that they took the time to attend Mr. Thompson's lecture and hear what he had to say before writing him off as one of the 'bad guys'.
Reply to this Top
So many things wrong with this editorial. He's not just selling guns for reduced cost to college students, but actually to anyone for the next two weeks. College student or not, if you care about yourself, your property, and your loved ones, then head to www.gunsatcost.com and save some money on the only security you can count upon. Just wanted to say thanks to Eric for the visit and for promoting self defense in a world full of helpless whiners.
Reply to this Top
It is also important to note that Mr. Thompson didn't exactly sell the weapon to Cho directly. Cho ordered the firearm through Mr. Thompson's website, and then the firearm was transferred to the Roanoke pawn shop where Cho had to pass the background check and pick up the gun. Thompson never had face to face contact with Cho- I wanted to make that clear, because this article implies that Thompson actually handed the weapon over to Cho. Additionally, Larry Hincker's statement implies that Mr. Thompson was irresponsibly handing out firearms to anyone, just to make a buck, which isn't true- I expected better of our university officials. I was able to spend a few hours after the talk with Mr. Thompson along with other SCCC members and he came off as a guy genuinely concerned with safety on campus- he certainly was no "attention seeking" monster. The editorial board needs to do more research before it writes (but whats new?), such as attend the talk itself.
Reply to this Top
Yes, no one in any way connected to the shooting, who although he did nothing wrong, is considered controversial and offensive by the Virginia Tech spokesman and the editorial board. Would you people be so rude if Cho's mother wished to speak at Virginia Tech and shared your grief over the situation? Would she have to blame guns for your approval? Would you condemn her if she blamed herself for the ordeal but nonetheless believed that students should be able to protect themselves? What's really offensive to you people? People associated tangentially to Cho, or simply your ridiculous distaste for guns? Where was the outrage when the Brady Campaign organized protests on the 16th in the same area that students were mourning? All I said was essentially, "Well, uh, we'd appreciate it if they'd move to a different location on campus, and they need to file a permit." Oh, protesting and exploiting victims is okay for you people when it's done by the Brady Campaign but when a gun dealer simply wishes to speak to 200 students on campus there's outrage. Mr. Hincker and the editorial board are the worst of hypocrites.
Reply to this Top
Of course Hinkler says it is wrong. He is willing to bet the lives of the students at the drop of a hat. Just how many have to die on your alter of political correctness and your agenda of gun control Mr. Hinkler? With 2.5 MILLION defensive uses of guns each year in America, Guns SAVE Lives
Reply to this Top
Thank you, CT, for restoring my faith in you. I agree 100%.
Reply to this Top
Apparently the author of this editorial has lost sight of one of the most important values in this country; personal responsibility. According to him, the burden of responsibility lies not with the person who commits the action. The author here would rather have you believe that instead of taking blame yourself, you can blame the grocery store that sold a kid bleach and chemicals to make a pipe bomb when he blows up his school. Or you can blame the restaurant that sold your fat uncle a greasy hamburger when he has a heart attack, even though he already had a history of high cholesterol. Personal responsibility has been lost in this country and it will be the downfall of our society if people like the author have their way.
Reply to this Top
Was the editorial board even present at the speech last night? From the sounds of it, I'm gonna say no.
Reply to this Top
The Ct gets all up in an array when a dealer tries to respectfully address the situation not on or the week of the anniversary but no one says anything when the Brady campaign protests ON THE DAY of April 16 across the nation. So why is it ok for the Brady campaign to protests on a day of remembrance and its not ok if Mr. Thompson wants to talk to students about firearms a week after?
Reply to this Top
CT Editorial board. I'd like to know which one of you was present last night, and what you saw that qualified as being "riled up." Otherwise, on behalf of responsible gun owners on campus, I must demand a retraction and apology.
Reply to this Top
One would think that the CT editorial board fits perfectly in VT admin's back pocket. Give me a break. As I posted on the news article regarding Thompson's visit, the emotions being expressed are unfounded and ridiculous. This editorial is the CT's official rant. They say, "we feel that he had little explanation to offer our community at this point in time." What exactly does this editorial offer our community? Just looks like more unsupported propaganda to me.
Reply to this Top
One of the things that's often brought up in this debate, and something I think needs to be addressed is the line "I wouldn't feel safe if I knew people are carrying." You know what? I ALREADY don't feel safe, knowing that I can't carry. Why don't I feel safe? Because people at campus HAVE been mugged, raped, and killed. Because mass shootings HAVE happened here, and elsewhere. I would say I have far more justification to not feel safe than someone who is afraid of a permit-holder going on a rampage - which has never been shown to be the case. If we're so worried about people being able to feel safe, then what of my "right" to feel safe?
Reply to this Top
Phillip? I think you meant Steve.
Reply to this Top
I can't believe this man would come to our campus. I can't believe a student group actually invited him to come. Having a debate about CC is one thing, but inviting this particular person here is really insensitive. This definitely changes how I will view the student CC group from now on.
Reply to this Top
to those saying that the EB did not object to the brady campaign, you are wrong : http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/2008/04/09/editorial__april_16_should_be_for_remembrance
Reply to this Top
Ick - There's no reason for "this man" not to come to our campus. He did nothing wrong. Your complaining about a guy who didn't kill 32 people makes about as much sense as me saying "How dare Steger set foot on campus? His anti-gun policies killed 32 of our fellow Hokies! Allowing him to remain president of the university is really insensitive." Hey, how about the UPS driver who transported the guns from the warehouse to the store where Cho got the gun? Should we ban him from campus? How about letter carriers from the Post Office where Cho sent his package to CNN, after already killing two people, should we ban them? How about Master Lock (or which ever company he used), whose locks kept officers out of the building for crucial minutes. Ban Master Locks from campus!
Reply to this Top