The gun debate in America today shows why we need to be rational about all of our policies and to reject Democrat “solutions".
Let’s look at the Virginia Tech massacre of April 16, 2007. Because all the facts are in about VT and that horrible event is even more shocking once you understand why it happened.
First here is a written quote from the Virginia Tech killer, Korean-born Cho Seung-Hui, who committed suicide after killing 32 people:
"You had everything you wanted. Your Mercedes wasn't enough, you brats. Your golden necklaces weren't enough, you snobs. Your trust fund wasn't enough. Your vodka and cognac weren't enough. All your debaucheries weren't enough. Those weren't enough to fulfill your hedonistic needs. You had everything.”
So there you go, first thing, right off the bat… the standard hate-the-rich agenda that you hear every day at every college in America and all over the media. Did this left-wing propaganda make Cho crazy?
Of course. It fed his mania just like it always tells the demented radicals to hate rich people, hate conservatives, hate Republicans, hate Tea Partiers, hate gun owners, hate corporations. It drives many people mad with rage and that is done intentionally by people on the Democrat left for political gain and power.
Because remember the ultimate truth: Guns don’t kill. People with evil ideas do. Angry people do.
Meanwhile the university elites refused to acknowledge many other signals that Cho was very likely to do something evil on the Virginia Tech campus, which is and was a “gun free” zone. Here is John R. Lott Jr. writing in The Wall Street Journal:
If we finally want to deal seriously with multiple-victim public shootings, it's time that we acknowledge a common feature of these attacks: With just a single exception, the attack in Tucson last year, every public shooting in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed since at least 1950 has occurred in a place where citizens are not allowed to carry their own firearms. Had some citizens been armed, they might have been able to stop the killings before the police got to the scene. In the Newtown attack, it took police 20 minutes to arrive at the school after the first calls for help.
And rest assured that when we get the full story on the Connecticut school shootings that we are going to find out a lot more about why this guy Lanza acted and it will shock a lot of people if they analyze it seriously. One of the things we already know is that he was addicted to violent video games. In short, his mind was poisoned just as Cho’s was.
Here are excerpts from wikipedia.org about the Virginia Tech killings with a Nikitas3.com comment after each:
Wikipedia.org reports: In eighth grade, Cho was diagnosed with severe depression … Cho's family sought therapy for him, and he received help periodically throughout middle school and high school. …Supposedly, high school officials had worked with his parents and mental health counselors to support Cho throughout his sophomore and junior years. Cho eventually chose to discontinue therapy. When he applied and was admitted to Virginia Tech, school officials did not report his speech and anxiety-related problems or special education status because of federal privacy laws that prohibit such disclosure unless a student requests special accommodation.
Comment: There you go… federal “privacy” laws, the kinds of laws that Democrats pass to “protect” crazy people from scrutiny. You know, so as not to be “judgmental”.
Wikipedia.org reports: The Virginia Tech Review Panel detailed numerous incidents of aberrant behavior beginning in Cho's junior year of college that should have served as a warning to his deteriorating mental condition. Several former professors of Cho reported that his writing as well as his classroom behavior was disturbing, and he was encouraged to seek counseling. He was also investigated by the university for stalking and harassing two female students. In 2005, Cho had been declared mentally ill by a Virginia special justice and ordered to seek outpatient treatment.
Comment: “Encouraged to seek counseling”. They should have forced him into it, but that would not be politically correct. “Outpatient treatment”? Any rational person could have seen that this guy needed to be kept in a facility and away from a college campus. But Virginia Tech is university America. And in liberal America today crazy people are always given the benefit of the doubt. This must end. We must always err strongly on the side of caution when dealing with such people.
It is like our multicultural/gay/feminist US military today where many people knew about the Muslim lunatic who killed all of those people at Fort Hood in Texas but did nothing about him. They gave him the benefit of the doubt when they should have thrown him out of the military. But that would have been called “racist” since the lunatic is a Muslim. So they did nothing. See how tolerant liberalism undermines us every day?
Wikipedia.org reports: The Virginia Tech Review Panel Report faulted university officials for failing to share information that would have shed light on the seriousness of Cho's problems, citing misinterpretations of federal privacy laws. The report also pointed to failures by Virginia Tech's counseling center, flaws in Virginia's mental health laws, and inadequate state mental health services, but concluded that "Cho himself was the biggest impediment to stabilizing his mental health" in college. The report also stated that the classification detail that Cho was to seek "outpatient" rather than "inpatient" treatment would generally have been legally interpreted at the time as not requiring that Cho be reported to Virginia's Central Criminal Records Exchange (CCRE) and entered into the CCRE database of people prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm.
Comment: Cho should have been on that database. The reason that he was not is explained further down. It is shocking.
In fact gun-rights advocates favor these databases in order to keep guns away from crazy people. But guess who opposes them most? Democrats and liberals just as they seek to discourage all databases about criminals, crazy people, sex offenders etc.
They say that classifying people by putting them on these databases hurts those people. And in dozens of other ways liberals always protect and defend the whackos. Democrats even round up people in mental hospitals and other facilities and take them to the polls to vote Democrat on election day.
Wikipedia.org reports: Some teachers, having seen many troubled students over the years and sensing deep problems with Cho, attempted to 'manage the situation' in such a way as to not alienate him and to allow him to successfully graduate with his reputation still intact.
Comment: Notice… “in such a way as not to alienate him”. This is typical touchy-feely, nanny-state thinking. And look at the result. Many people should have stopped Cho individually or collectively. They did not. It was a folly of stupidity and neglect. The Virginia Tech massacre never should have happened. Except that it happened in liberal America right under the noses of the elites.
Wikipedia.org reports: Media organizations, including Newsweek, MSNBC, Reuters and the Associated Press even raised questions and speculated the similarity between a stance in one of Cho's videos, which showed him holding and raising a hammer, and a pose from promotional posters for the South Korean movie Oldboy.
Comment: You could assume that Cho saw that movie since he was born in South Korea and since the movie is geared to young male viewers.
Wikipedia.org reports: Oldboy is the second installment of The Vengeance Trilogy…
Comment: Yes… “vengeance”. And Cho definitely was seeking “vengeance” when he killed all of those people. The movie surely influenced him. Because it validated the crazy thoughts that he was having. This is what sets off a lot of these nuts – seeing their situation validated when it is portrayed in books, films, plays, in the media.
Wikipedia.org reports: The film follows the story of one Oh Dae-su who is locked in a hotel room for 15 years without knowing his captor's motives. When he is finally released, Dae-su finds himself still trapped in a web of conspiracy and violence. His own quest for vengeance becomes tied in with romance when he falls for an attractive sushi chef.
The film won the Grand Prix at the 2004 Cannes Film Festival and high praise from the President of the Jury, director Quentin Tarantino. … In 2008, voters on CNN named it one of the ten best Asian films ever made.
Comment: This movie was made by people who are part of the global film industry who are overwhelmingly, if not all, hard-core international socialists and “pacifists” and gun controllers like most of the lefties in Hollywood. Oldboy then was praised by the liberals at Cannes. Meanwhile all of those voters on ultra-liberal CNN embraced the violence and voted for it. Do you see how this chain of events elevates violent trash like Oldboy?
Then notice who praised Oldboy… Quentin Tarantino, the most violent filmmaker in Hollywood who enriches himself with violence year after year
(Cho) re-enacted scenes from a violent South Korean film in videos he made before he massacred 32 students and teachers.
Police believe Cho Seung-Hui repeatedly watched the movie Oldboy as part of what they now think was his meticulous preparation for the killing spree at Virginia Tech University.
Cho, 23, born in South Korea, spent six days before Monday's attacks recording the videos. In one pose he wields a hammer and in another he holds a gun to his head – both striking images from the movie.
Comment: Dailymail.co.uk then shows an image from Oldboy with an Asian actor pointing a gun to his own head. And next to it is an image of Cho pointing a gun to his head in the exact same pose.
Dailymail.co.uk reports that:
Another pose where Cho displays both guns he used is reminiscent of the work of John Woo, the Hong Kong director of such violent action movies as Face/Off
Comment: More violence from another international media celebrity. Meanwhile Cho is the type of fringe character who is set off by media violence. And then the filmmakers say, “It was just one guy. I am not responsible. We cannot control every person.” This is typical leftist self-exoneration.
Why don’t they just stop making violent movies in the first place?
Answer: Because they are getting rich making them while proclaiming themselves ‘pacifists’.
Here is wikipedia.org reporting on Oldboy: Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film four stars (out of four). Ebert remarked: "We are so accustomed to 'thrillers' that exist only as machines for creating diversion that it's a shock to find a movie in which the action, however violent, makes a statement and has a purpose."
Comment: So the top film critic in America praised Oldboy. That is how this stuff is legitimized and gets seen by so many people. Ebert is partly guilty for the Virginia Tech massacre.
Now here is a writer named Grady Hendrix on Slate.com claiming that all of the violence in the media does not affect people. This is how the Democrat elite covers for itself and for each other while blaming violence on guns:
It's taken professional pundits several days to link the Virginia Tech shootings to a violent piece of pop culture—frankly, I think they're slipping. A photo of Cho Seung-Hui wielding a hammer—included in the package that Cho mailed to NBC News— mimics a scene from the Korean movie Oldboy. Over on her blog, showbiz reporter Nikki Finke demonstrates the standard-issue rending of garments and crying to the heavens that comes when a violent movie seems to inspire a horrific act: "I just don't understand how critics with even a shred of humanity keep supporting films that celebrate violence in all its awfulness."
In the end, Oldboy bears no more responsibility for the Virginia Tech shootings than American Idol, but it's fortunate that it has come up. In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter a few years ago, Oldboy's director Park said, "My films are the stories of people who place the blame for their actions on others because they refuse to take on the blame themselves." And that's one of the smartest things that anyone's said so far about the motives of Cho Seung-Hui.
Comment: See how the “peaceful” liberals reflexively defend media violence? Interesting, is it not? And do you know why they do it?
Because these are in fact violence-loving leftists hiding behind their fake ‘pacifist’ personas. And they are seeking to undermine America with media violence, to make our nation more violent and then to impose their “solution” which includes controlling all guns and all people.
Then remember that Cho, like the character in the movie, blamed other people for his problems and then killed them. Blaming others is a basic leftist tactic. So the movie reinforced the blamer in Cho and then showed him a violent way to resolve his problems.
And by the way, if movies don’t influence anyone as these liberals persistently contend then why do we never see movies with violence against blacks or gays or with a Jewish banker as the villain?
It is because the media elites know well that films indeed influence people so they never show violence against certain liberal groups or show anything negative about them.
CNNcom reported: MSNBC.com reported that Cho also discussed "martyrs like Eric and Dylan" apparently referring to Columbine High School gunmen Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, who killed 13 people and themselves on April 20, 1999, in Littleton, Colorado.
Comment: Klebold and Harris were acting out another violent film, Natural Born Killers by Obama-loving Hollywood director Oliver Stone. But don’t let that fact get into the debate. The Aurora theater shooter was acting out Batman.
CNN.com reported: ….A temporary detention order from General District Court in the commonwealth of Virginia (by psychologist Roy Crouse) said Cho "presents an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness."
A box indicating that the subject "Presents an imminent danger to others as a result of mental illness" was not checked.
Comment: Notice “danger to himself”. Not to anyone else… This is the way these psychologists like Crouse enable massacres like Virginia Tech to happen. It all comes out of the political left where crazy people are given every benefit of every doubt. Rational people would have checked the box.
CNN.com reports: A handwritten section of the form (by Crouse) describes Cho. "Affect is flat and mood is depressed," said the order, which was signed December 14 by Special Justice Paul M. Barnett. "He denies suicidal ideation. He does not acknowledge symptoms of a thought disorder. His insight and judgment are normal."
Comment: “Normal”? I don’t think so. And remember that Barnett approved the form without the “danger to others” box checked. Barnett and Crouse both share culpability for Virginia Tech.
Indeed there are many people who could have stopped Cho but who let this massacre happen by neglect and stupidity. Yet they blame the National Rifle Association and legitimate gun ownership. Because liberals never accept responsibility for their failures, just like Obama blames Bush year after year after year for the economy.
It will be interesting to find out what really happened in the Newtown school case. Because there are many things that we do not yet know. Watch for a Nikitas3.com analysis when the report comes out, including how many people knew about the mental state of the killer Lanza and did nothing, including his own mother.
CNN.com reported: The gun shop owner who sold (Cho) the Glock 9 mm, one of the guns used (in the Virginia Tech murders), said Cho easily passed a background check …before buying the weapon.
Comment: Sure. He was able to pass the background check because Crouse didn’t check the “danger to others” box and then the judge, Barnett, let it pass.
(Please bookmark this website. And please click the Google button (g+1) at the top of this page and recommend this site to all of your friends. Let’s make Nikitas3.com the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. Thank you, Nikitas)