Re: "Survivor of Virginia Tech Massacre Brings Gun Control Message to Maine"

Phil Smythe <smytph@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in

On Nov 28, 1:58 am, RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net> wrote:
Phil Smythe <smy...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote

On Nov 27, 2:23 am, RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net>
"Scout" <me4g...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman@comcast[remove].net> wrote in message
Peter Franks <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in

On 11/23/2010 6:24 PM, Phil Smythe wrote:
On Nov 24, 7:14 am, Zombywoof<fishwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 19:07:26 -0800 (PST), Phil Smythe

<smy...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 23, 2:15 am, Peter Franks<n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/11/2010 4:22 PM, Phil Smythe wrote:

Survivor of Virginia Tech Massacre Brings Gun Control
Message to Maine

11/10/2010 Reported By: Tom Porter

The Virginia Tech campus killings began with two
shootings in a residence hall early on the morning of
April 16th. I was hosting a jazz show on college radio
when word began to filter through that something bad was

No-one who was on campus is likely to forget what
happened that morning. For senior Colin Goddard, what
turned out to be a life- changing experience started like
just another school morning.

"That morning--it was a Monday--I was not listening to
the radio, I checked my emails, did not receive any
emails related to what happened in AJ (Ambler Johnston
Hall). I went to pick up a friend Christina, we were
running about five minutes late, so we were sitting in
the parking lot debating whether or not to go. In the end
we decided we should go to this."

About 40 minutes into class, says Goddard, they heard a
series of bangs from down the hall--a noise they
initially attributed to construction work that was being
done at the building. But these bangs got progressively
louder and closer.

"And that's when the class paused again and people
started to think, 'this is not what we thought it was.' I
remember looking at the teacher's face, watching her
expression drop. She walked towards to the door to look
into the hallway. As soon as she opened the door, she
shut it back again and said, 'Everybody get under your
desk, and called 9-1-1. And that wa
when it was like, really? Is this really happening? Is
someone shooting here in our building?"

Goddard describes how the gunman, Seuing-Hui Cho, fired
through the door before entering the classroom where he
and 15 other students had been having a French lesson.
"The next 10 minutes was probably the longest 10 minutes
of my life. It felt like hours. When I learned afterwards
it was only nine and a half minutes, it blew my mind."

Cho returned to Goddard's classroom several times over
those ten minutes, deliberately targeting students who
were lying on the floor. Colin Goddard himself was shot
four times; he still carries three bullets in his body
and has a titanium rod in his left leg. He was lucky.
"Including my teacher, there were
people in that classroom and there are seven who are
still alive today. Any time a crazy situation happens, it
leaves yo
with the question of why and how did this happen?"

The attacks drew widespread domestic and international
criticism of America's gun laws. One aspect of reform
Colin Goddard is heavily involved in, is trying to
tighten up the so-called "gun show loophole"--an apparent
gap in the legislation that enables people to obtain
firearms at gun shows without undergoing background

What about the self-defense loophole? That loophole
resulted i
the death of 32 defenseless people.

So are you saying that nobody there could use any form of
self-defense (despite the fact that people did successfully
defend themselves)? If you are then you're a bigger idiot
than I gave you credit for. If not, then please explain the
"self-defense loophole".

Ahh yes the infamous running screaming waving you hands in
the air defense. Very effective.

It is according to your fellow pro-gunner RD Sandman who
spoke of some of the Virginia Tech survivors thus; "They
defended themselves by getting the hell out of Dodge."

But of course, according to you, that's not effective. I'm
sure even RD is embarrassed by your nonsensical rantings.

It ***ISN'T*** effective. 32 people died.

I'm amazed that you continue to defend the attacker.

Actually, he didn't. He has stated, "No, Cho's the one
responsible. His access to firearms made it doable, ..."

Both statements are correct.

They may be true, but one contains an implication that Cho would
have been unable to engage in this violent crime unless he had
access to firearms.

That implication could be read into or not depending on the
mindset of the reader. I agree that in Phil's case, he is
absolutely hopping on t
gun theme but Cho could have quite easily done his damage in
another way.

There are two reasons I'm "hopping on the gun theme". One is that
this is a gun politics newsgroup and as such is the appropriate
place and two is that it was firearms that he used.

Yep, but you hop on it to the absolute exclusion of anything else.

That's like complaining about people only wanting to talk about
electric cars when discussing the state of the automobile industry in
the newsgroup talk.electric_cars

In fact, he seemed to have planned to at one point.

I find that a false implication because he is known to have

alternative plans that did not involve firearms.


So while that

statement is technically true, I consider it somewhat
misleading, at best.

That is what you get from Phil. He will argue and hang from his
fingernails over a cliff before he will admit that he was wrong.
him in person and be glad he doesn't live here in this country.

If I'm wrong I WILL admit it,


No, always. I'm far from infallible.

That we know. That you don't always admit when you are wrong, we also

 and there have incidences (rare

happily). So many pro-gunners love to call me wrong based on their
interpretation of what I write despite what I write not supporting
that my telling them their interpretations are incorrect.

Is English your first language, Phil?  Did you have any problem
formulating that last sentence?

It is my first language and it appears that it should have read "So
many pro-gunners love to call me wrong based on their interpretation
of what I write despite what I write not supporting that (and) my
telling them their interpretations are incorrect. Sorry if the
omission of the coordinating conjunction "and" caused such confusion.
As you can see it was not so much an error of grammar as a missed word
while typing. Don't worry, I promise not to seize onto any of your
grammatical/typing errors.

Not a problem, just curious was all.

Anyway, people tend to read what you write, not what you were
thinking when you wrote it.

No, they don't, that is the problem.

They constantly read me write "I believe X" and then come back with
"So you believe Y?" This kind of elaborate extrapolation based more on
the person responding to me than anything I've said is very common.

Also I'm often told that although my words don't state it, my actual
aim is something else, ie total disarming of the population. When I
state that is NOT my position I'm often told that I'm wrong and it is
my position, despite nobody actually being able to quote me saying
this. All their accusations are based on what they "infer" and what I
supposedly "imply". Apparently I have little say over what I truly
believe. The list goes on and the examples are many.

Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

Experience is learning from your mistakes....
Wisdom is learning from the mistakes of others.

Sleep well tonight,

RD (The Sandman)

Experience is learning from your mistakes....
Wisdom is learning from the mistakes of others.