I haven't read this whole thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating something. But it seems very obvious to me that with tight enough gun control, Virginia Tech wouldn't ever have happened. It's not very easy to murder 32 people in just a few hours with a knife. In the UK we just don't get massacres like this. Why do you think that is? Maybe because we don't have any guns.
Which is better:
Cho murders those two people, then two hours later he starts shooting up the school, wounding or killing a few more, and then the students pull our their handguns and shoot him down.
Cho can't get hold of a gun. Cho shoots nobody.
During my childhood,
the kids in my neighborhood
( including me ) were armed to the teeth
with commercially manufactured guns ( Smith & Wesson, Colt, etc. )
That fact did not stop us from MAKING our own guns
because IT WAS FUN, quick and e z.
The neighborhood abounded in amateur gunsmiths,
of varying degrees of quality, depending on talent
and willingness to put a little more time & attention into it.
The English press has recorded a massive increase
in crimes of violence including use of guns in England.
A few years ago, one of your retired police officers
told of how he had been ordered to cook the books,
for record keeping purposes, regarding statistics
of crimes of armed violence, to conceal the increase,
for political purposes.
Guns were among the world's first machines with moving parts,
(tho more easily made now with modern "know-how").
Guns were not new to Columbus nor to his grandfather.
They are simple machines, easily made.
(The M-1 Carbine was invented by a prisoner, David Williams, in prison for moonshining;
convicts have secretly made pistols [including fully functional submachineguns] in prison workshops.)
The accumulated knowledge of the gunsmith is not secret;
it is among the world's freely available engineering data.
If criminals had no guns, they'd arm themselves using that information
and access to the hardware stores of America;
thus the FUTILITY of "gun control" philosophy:
the disarmament of criminals is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE.
BANISHMENT of violently felonious recidivists can reduce misconduct.
Crime comes from bad people, not from their tools.
Should umbrellas be blamed for rain? pens for forgery? spoons for obesity?
Repressionists want to remove guns, saying they are sometimes used to facilitate crime.
They fail to understand that the actual weapon is the HUMAN MIND
whose cleverness has not been controlled nor restrained (even in prison).
This mind expresses itself perseveringly, into the manifestation of its felt needs
or desires, and it has FOREVER to do the job that it selects
(e.g., the art of the gunsmith/merchant). Prohibition is futile