Protestors lie down for tougher gun laws
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Media General News Service
Published: April 16, 2008
A lie-in at Capital Square today attracted about 50 onlookers supporting tougher gun laws to help avert future gun tragedies.
On the first anniversary of the Virginia Tech shootings, 32 people dressed in black lay still on the grass for three minutes to represent the 32 victims of gunman Seung-Hui Cho and the time it took him to buy a gun.
Organizers asked Virginia legislators to close the so-called “gun show loophole” in state laws. At a gun show, an unlicensed, private dealer can sell a gun without doing a background check on the purchaser. Cho did not buy either of his two guns at a gun show.
The lie-in was supported by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and ProtestEasyGuns.com.
Pam Carnahan, a family friend of injured Tech student Emily Haas, offered thoughts and prayers for the families of Tech victims and for “all who have lost their lives or been injured as a result of gun violence.”
Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, was the only visible opponent of gun control in the crowd. He said that if students at Tech had been armed, then Cho may have been stopped before he killed 32 people.
Page 1 of 1
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( AMCIT ) on April 16, 2008 at 6:29 pm
It’s a shame the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence uses this tragedy and its victims for political purposes. None of their proposed “cures” would have prevented the VT tragedy.
Let’s show some respect for the VT victims and not let some political wannabes use our students.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( mmarin ) on April 16, 2008 at 4:23 pm
A lie-in does nothing but show the only option available to an unarmed populace versus an armed aggressor: death.
It’s sad that so much effort is being used to supress the tool and not those that choose to wield a tool with mal intent.
The Virginian Mental Health system is horrible. It will continue to be such as it’s not a funding priority. Anti-gunners should look to fixing that system for more immediate results versus disarming law abiding persons from having the ability to defend themselves.
Unfortunatly, the plain truth of the matter is/was that Virginia Tech and the Commonwealth did the math. It’s cheaper to pay 100K per dead student than it is to provide the 24x7 armed security personnel all over campus that’s required to give the same level of assurance that an armed student populace can provide.
For more details, google Warren v. District of Columbia.
Report Inappropriate Comment