Collegiate Times

So finally the anti-gun people admit that they're using April 16th to push their agendas!! Perfect quote, Fausser, bravo!

Well, you show your true colors Gordon. You talk about the gun show "loophole" like it is truth. You all continue to ignore truth like you have your fingers in your ears. Besides, the legislation introduced last year passed by a strong majority, which indicates that the vast majority of the student body was against protests. If you weren't trying to push your own agenda, you would have said that.

So wait, they protested the gun show loophole? Since it doesn't exist, did the protest really happen? Ya know, if a protester falls in the woods, does anyone listen?

Omar Samaha seems desperate to continue his 15 minutes of connected to notoriety fame. He should just allow his deceased sister to rest in piece and get on with his own life, not continue to create wild claims about gun shows to soak in media attention.

This is completely disrespectful.

It is not disrespectful to push to save lives on a day where we remember friends and family who have died. It did not interrupt any of the ceremonies or anyone elses healing process and is part of ours.

It IS disrespectful, Anon. Its funny how people like you will argue that everyone heals in their own way at the same time as saying it isn't hurting anyone's healing process. Stop thinking you can speak for everyone else, it's very arrogant. And btw, the people here are people, and if they're saying it's disrespectful, do they not count? Or are you really just whining because you have dissent for your views? Anti-gunners tend to whine about and mute their opposition way too much (because they know they're wrong).

I hate guns and what they can do to people. BUT yesterday's demonstration was disrespectful. Not everyone who is anti-gun supports what they did.

When will these anti-gun nuts stop using these tragedies to push their agendas? When will these anti-gun nuts realize that these tragedies most often occur in areas designated "gun-free" and the law-abiding citizens are not able to defend themselves. Also, the police who are supposed to "protect and serve" wait outside until the gunfire is over to not find themselves in any danger. America needs less gun-control, not more. Is it not surprising that the cities with the highest violent crime rates are also the cities with the MOST laws against gun ownership?

Maybe next time they should lay there for 10-15 min because that's the average amount of time that the state police background check takes, which Cho went through for both of the guns that he purchased legally at gun shops...not gun shows. Both of these shops were investigated by the ATF (bureau of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms) and I dont know about the other one, but at least one of the two was found to have done everything in accordance with the law. Cho has nothing to do with the so called "gun show loophole"

Having the protest yesterday was in bad taste, just like it is in bad taste for the '9/11 truthers' to have their protest every September 11th. Guns are the last thing I want to think about on Arpil 16th. That being said, I don't think it is all that unreasonable to close the 'gun show loophole.' I don't like how anyone can buy a dozen guns with cash at a gun show without a background check, showing ID, or even giving a name. Why is it such a horrible thing to mandate a background check and 3 day waiting period for all firearm purchases?

This is the "common sense" thing that Brady wants you to believe gun control is about. However, there is a huge gap between common sense and fact. Google "gun show loophole myth" and see for yourself why people oppose it. It's not as simple as you make it sound and this point has been beaten to death on every article and webpage in existence.

First, Seung-Hui Cho did not buy his weapons at a gun show. Second, if anyone thinks it takes 3 minutes to buy a gun, dream on. Seung-Hui Cho bought his guns at a licensed gun store. He had to fill out several pages of paperwork and pass a background check. In all my gun purchases, it takes an average time of 20 minutes to fill out the paperwork, and then the background check is submitted. It can take anywhere from 10 minutes to days for the background check to come back. The so called "loophole" that allowed Seung-Hui Cho to purchase his guns, given his mental health history, was a failure on the mental health system to report his history to the Federal and State background systems. Guns do not kill people; people kill people, and to think that reducing the number of guns will reduce crime is absurd. Criminals will chose another weapon such a kitchen knife or even an ink pen. Are all you anti-gun people out there going to propose people cannot purchase kitchen knives or ink pens without a criminal background check? ... Come on folks, learn the facts and use some common sense.

50 people agree with the brady campaign, that sounds about right.

Guns aren't bad...idiots and crazy people with guns are bad. If you limit the legality of guns, the people that really want guns (mostly people with bad intentions) will find a way to get them; so that instead of having more registered, traceable guns, you will have illegal untraceable guns. I think that this is EXTREMELY DISRESPECTFUL. Using the anniversary of a tragedy to push an anti-gun agenda...That more than crosses the line.

If the families want to protest guns, it is their right. They are the ones who have suffered. The pro-gun drivel in the comments on this page (associated with 4/16) are the disrepectful posts.

why is it disrespectful to lay quietly in the grass at the end of the drillfield for three minutes? They didn't yell or shout or stand in front of the memorial or Norris Hall with signs. They just laid down in the grass. You wouldn't even know they were there if you didn't have someone tell you. live and let live.

Its disrespectful because she's taking advantage of a tragedy to push a political message. Gun shows have nothing to do with 4-16 and its shameful that she is desecrating the memory of the fallen with this demonstration.

They laid down on the grass for 3 minutes in silence!? My God that's intolerable!

Yeah yall make a good point. The gun did it.....so let's blame it on the gun....what a joke

It is intolerable, they could have laid down of 5 seconds and it still would have been bad. The issue isn't the act, it's what the act represents, a political protest on the anniversary of a tragedy. It's especially bad because the gun show loophole had nothing to do with 4/16. We are upset because she is manipulating a horrible event to further her cause.

No, Anon's, it's ok because fluffy bunnies and good people were there. And those things are inherently good so what we're doing couldn't be bad! No we DESERVE to protest in whatever way we want!! We're LOUD and PROUD!!! And whatever we WANT we MUST GET!!!! Now if we used ANY logic instead of just EMOTION we might get somewhere!!!!!

So, this might sound odd...but why can't all parties use some common sense. If I as a gun owner would be willing to spend a little bit of extra time for a Mandatory series of checks into my history, and I have nothing to hide, then when I receive my gun I know that I am 100% secure in my rights. And, if I as a non-gun owner know for certain that the gun owners in my community have gone through all of the proper channels, and there is full compliance, I can be fairly assured that the gun owner isn't some nut, or criminal or has any suspicious motives. I would fully expect that the rights of those who are good citizens would Only Be Strengthened by putting additional safeguards in place And would actually reduce questions/controversy around gun ownership at all. Eliminate any gray areas and your rights are stronger. So, can we try it?

Well Common Sense there are a few problems with what you said. Number 1 is that background checks are an intrusion of our 4th Amendment rights and are pushed by anti gun nuts with the intention of discouraging gun ownership which goes against the second Amendment. Background checks are only minimally effective at deterring crime because repeat offenders are less likely to buy guns from retail sources. Most of the people that buy retail guns with criminal intent are first time offenders that background checks wouldn't catch. Finally you don't have a right to feel safe but you do have the right to not have your gun ownership infringed upon.

To Common Sense: the problem with gun legislation is that you can never be assured that the gun owners around you have legally purchased their guns. Until the flow of illegal guns can be stopped, which I don't believe it can, then additional laws will only allow the government to further regulate the wrong group of people: those who own weapons for recreation and defense. As a side note, I feel the need to repeat that Cho DID NOT LEGALLY PURCHASE HIS GUNS. Just because he fell through the cracks of the background check system and his disqualifying courtroom verdict didn't appear during the check doesn't mean that the purchase was legal. Would you say that an underage person who buys alcohol just because the cashier doesn't card him has legally purchased it?

I'd also submit to a full cavity search for drugs without a warrant, as I have nothing to hide.

And I have to repeat this over and over.. "common sense" is ignorant sense. Common sense implies that you "know" the answer just because it appears obvious to you. Reality (and a little research) will actually show you that your view is uninformed and rather ignorant. But go ahead, assert "common sense" and don't worry about any of those annoying "facts" that might counter what you believe, because you know best! C'mon, there's a reason why certain people are called "experts" - give some respect to those who know and stop with the "I know because I know" crap. Educated people don't think that way.

Using terms like "common sense", and "reasonable" is an old, and very deliberate tactic by gun control proponents because they mean something different to everyone, and when you use those terms in a question such as "do you think we should make gun laws more reasonable?" everyone asked is going to answer that question with an affirmative response with completely different intentions. This is how the gun control people pump up their poll numbers. They use ambiguous words, and terms to get people to respond to contrived questions in ways that can be manipulated when poll results are published.

Are all you anti-gun people out there going to propose people cannot purchase kitchen knives or ink pens without a criminal background check? ------------------------------------------------------------ 07 Alum... they're doing that in England already.

thats yet another reason why england sucks

First off to "Alum", VT ERT attempted to enter Norris as gun shoots where heard, once finding an entrance that was able to be shoot opened, they entered the building, as gun shoots where still going off. There was NO sitting and waiting for the shoots to stop. The VT police officers that day put their lives on the line to save as many as they could. They fully upheld their duty to protect and serve. "Also, the police who are supposed to "protect and serve" wait outside until the gunfire is over to not find themselves in any danger.” Second, there is no gun show loop hole. When buying a firearm from a licensed dealer you NEED a background check, gun show or not. When buying a firearm privately from a citizen you do not need a background check, gun show or not. The fact that it is a gun show plays zero role in whether a background check is required. While yes, I feel requiring a background check for all firearm purchases would likely be a good thing; it has been shown that banning handguns outright is not effective in decreasing crime, and actually causes a sharp increase in violent crime. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp? ARTICLE_ID=15304 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated ------------------------------ Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ---- ------------- -------------

AUganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ----------------------------- Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. ------------------------------ It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: List of 7 items: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent. Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent. Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson. With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'. t.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends. The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental. SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN! SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THAT IS ISSUED A RIFLE. SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!! IT'S A NO BRAINER! DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET. There is an effort in Switzerland at the moment to enforce a gun ban. It is based on the UN's desire to disarm the world!! I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment! If you are too, please forward. I have sent this to eveyone in my address book. Don't let it stop here.......... Just think how powerful our government is getting. They think these other countries just didn't do it righ

stopping the sale of firearms to people only creates another good product for the criminals to sell you cant even control the flow of stupid drugs in this country you must be one of them dumbacrats

you have a good point harry all ready they are targeting houses with gun collections and ammo now they have another high price items the criminals have to steal and sell

There are many images on the Web. How can you know whether some image is original or has been edited by Photoshop? Check it out using <a href="http://www.pskiller.com/">Photoshopped Image Killer</a>. Specify your image's URL and the site will do analysis for you automatically.