E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSLaw enforcement officials have confirmed that the shooter who killed a police officer at Virginia Tech yesterday was not a student. Officials have also confirmed from video rolling inside the officer's patrol car, that clothes found next to the deceased gunman matched that of the shooter. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
BLACKSBURG, Virginia - Investigators believe the gunman who killed a Virginia Tech policeman acted alone and that he changed clothes after fleeing the scene, then killed himself with his handgun when another officer spotted him, state police said Friday.
The events unfolded on the same day Virginia Tech officials were in Washington, fighting a federal government fine over their handling of the 2007 massacre where 33 people were killed. The shooting brought back painful memories. About 150 students gathered silently for a candlelight vigil on a field facing the stone plaza memorial for the 2007 victims. An official vigil is planned for Friday night.
Police spokeswoman Corinne Geller said investigators have not found anything connecting the gunman and the slain officer, Deriek W. Crouse, who was shot in his car Thursday in a campus parking lot after pulling over a driver for a traffic stop. The motive remains a mystery, she said.
"That's very much the fundamental part of the investigation right now," Geller said at a news conference.
Not a student at the university
The gunman was not a student at Virginia Tech, the scene of the deadliest gun rampage in modern U.S. history in 2007. Geller said investigators were confident they know the gunman's identity but she declined to say anything more about his name, age or hometown until the medical examiner confirms his identity and next of kin are notified.
The campus shooting prompted officials to lock down the university for hours while police and elite response teams searched the school.
Authorities have in-car video from Crouse's cruiser that shows a man with a handgun at the officer's car at the time of the shooting.
Geller laid out the most detailed account thus far of the shooting. She said Crouse had pulled over a car driven by a student and was stopped on a campus parking lot with the car in front of his cruiser. She said the driver, who she didn't name, had no connection to the shooting and has been very helpful to investigators.
Crouse was sitting in his cruiser when the gunman walked up and shot him. Geller declined to say if the officer was wearing body armor or where exactly he was shot. He was not able to return fire, she said.
The gunman fled on foot and went to nearby greenhouses, where investigators say he changed out of a pullover wool cap and left them there with his backpack.
Geller said a deputy sheriff on patrol then noticed a man at the back of a parking lot about half a mile from the shooting. The man was by himself and acting "a little suspicious." The officer drove around to approach him, lost sight of the man and then found him on the ground. The man appeared to have a self-inflicted gunshot wound and a handgun was nearby.
Crouse was an Army veteran and married father of five children and stepchildren who joined the campus police force in October 2007. He previously worked at a jail and for the Montgomery County sheriff's department.
Crouse was one of about 50 officers on the campus force, which also has 20 full- and part-time security guards. Crouse received an award in 2008 for his commitment to the department's drunken driving efforts. He was trained as a crisis intervention officer and as a general, firearms and defensive tactics instructor.
The university also said its counseling center would be open all day Friday for students.
Read more content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Lawsuit settled: No tuxes, dresses at graduation
- Thais divided by anti-free speech crackdown
- Former prisoners: Blagojevich faces rude awakening
- Now what, as Senate blocks consumer nominee?
- 'May die 2day,' girl Facebooks before mom kills her
Leave a Comment:
At least the gunman had the decency to kill himself and save the state the associated costs .
He could have just left at that, instead of taking a father of five along with him.
R. Scalzo and flbikerchick, you disgust me. ANYONE committing suicide is a tragedy. The shooting, obviously, was also a tragedy, but that doesn't mean we should celebrate a man taking his own life. Disgusting.
I wouldn't exactly call it 'celebrating'.
The whole situation is disgusting. But - out of the two people who died, only one had a choice in the matter. Can't say I feel as bad for his fate since it was self directed.
went straight for a public servant.
who wants to put money investigators will find a glenn beck book on his night stand, or his relatives will reveal he religiously watched fox news.
just another isolated incident. no reason to pay any attention to it.
Stateatty, Why are you so disghusted? It's disghusting to think that some bleeding heart liberal jury might have believed that this person that shot a father of five sworn to protect and serve was somehow innocent. Save your self righteous indignation for the officers wife and children.
it is going to be important to piece this together, just today a gunman in La., walking down the street shot and killed one person and shot at several auto's before the police took him down; are all these unrelated, or is it a sign of a breakdown of social order; now three years into a depression ( that is what it really is ), and no light showing at the end of the tunnel, is society coming apart at the seams ?
Nope, wrong. The @!$%# bag killed an innocent person and deprived a family of their Father. No mercy, he just expedited his one way ticket to hell.
StateAtty - If you are what your handle indicates it would not surprise me. Your bleeding heart attitude towards this coward who walked up and shot a cop for no apparent reason is what is wrong with our justice system. Everyone seems to have pity for the criminal for one reason or another - his tough childhood, his lack of work, etc. but no one seems to have the same compassion fr the victims whose lives they destroy or end. It is time we stopped all this mollycoddling of the criminals and started paying more attention to their victims. I have no problem with the fact that this person killed themselves and definitely do not see it as any kind of tragedy. He killed a police officer and at least had the decency to save the public the time and expense, and trauma to the victims family of having to go through a trial. I for one am glad this PoS is dead and refuse to feel sorry for him for mourn this fact in any way.
You need to proofread, msnbc. On the home page, the headline reads "Vt Gunman..."
I guess it was more important to get it out quick than accurate.
You need to proofread Lisa. It's MSNBC, not msnbc.
The Vt is for VA Tech, not Vermont
nit pickers !!!
Lisa, VT is Virginia Tech not Vermont.
I feel badly for the officer who lost his life for NOTHING and to his family and 5 children....right here at Christmas. How horribly sad that he can't watch his children grow up, have grandchildren and live a nice life. It really breaks your heart there are such mean and cruel in our world. What is it? Drugs? Mentally ill? God forgive me, but I'm glad the gunman was such a COWARD that he killed himself.
Hey Airdog. You're the one who needs to proof read: It's "msnbc" (lower case). Pwned!!
Zach... you're not on top of things either. I think you meant to type "owned".
Should have been Virginia Tech or VT, not Vt.
Just like MSNBC is actually NOT msnbc, as MicroSoft National Broadcasting Corporation.
Just like MOUSE is not mouse (rodent), as Movable Object USEr Interface.
Just like USN SEALs is not seals nor Seals (animals), as United States Navy SEa Air Land.
The problem with this is most are forgetting that these are more than what the lower case indicates by definition (completely different definintions and meanings). Unlike the nit picking of grammar, spelling, etc. of the evolutionary American English Language.
Anyway back on topic.
There seems to be more to this than what is being said. Seems too premeditated:
1. Was the gunman previously associated with the Police Officer in a previous situation (traffic stop, drunk driving, case, etc.). US Military (something that happened when both were in the US Military).
2. Possible secondary association between Police Officer, gunman's wife, children, stepchildren, etc.. Police Officer's wife, children, etc. to gunman's wife, children, etc..
3. Possible third association between Police Officer and gunman, like a friend or mutual acquaintance.
I have seen this type of thing before, too many times in the US Military. Usually we are instructed to say, "No comment on an ongoing Investigation", Not a day or two later, Especially in cases of Murder/Suicide:
It is better to say, "No comment on an ongoing Investigation" (we do not know yet), than later have to seem incompetent or people saying "coverup" when other Facts become known during the Investigation(s).
In the case of the US Military, if you are appointed as the Investigating Officer (the bureaucrat, that complies all the facts, then writes up the results) everything you say or do can and will be held against you (it is not unusual to be grilled by both sides during the Hearings and Court). The Rules are simple, you cannot Investigate a Unit you are associated with, you cannot talk to the News Media (later a JAG Officer will announce the results of the Court or Hearings), procedures must be adhered to (or you can face charges under the UCMJ), if you have any conflicts of interest you can request being relieved from being appointed as the Investigating Officer (usually asked before you are appointed, sometimes during the course of the investigation, the Investigating Officer might uncover something that even remotely or perceived to associate them with the case.). etc..
add to post#2.8.
Forgot one of the biggest reasons to get Relieved as an Investigating Officer, presumption of Guilt or Innocence of anyone involved before the case is completely investigated.
Thank God the guy killed himself because the Liberals would have given him 10 yrs. worth of appeals and human rights vigils so he wouldn't be put to death by We The People !!!!! I'm one of those bloodthirsty right wing fanatics , he-he !!!
David-475776 I think I'll direct your attention to the graphic at the top of this story. Seems that msnbc identifies their organization as "msnbc". More pwnage!!
Unisyn, there is a difference between "pwned" and "owned". A visit to old Mr. Google and the internets (I know, capital "I" and no "s") could clear this up for you. Pwned!!
Zach: Sorry.... not all of us are so keen on the gaming terminology that was derived from a misspelling of the word "owned" in the first place (yes, it was originally supposed to be spelled "owned", but due to a MISTAKE it was spelled "pwned" and the gamers used it within their close knit group. I'm too busy designing jets and producing music to sit around and learn all the new terminology that the gamers use. I only looked it up exploit the ridiculousness of it's use.
Who's to say the gunman didn't transfer his clothes that he was wearing at the time of the shooting to a backpack, shoot another innocent person, and leave the backpack near the victim to cover up his actions? It seems highly likely this could have happened. I hope they find additional evidence.
Fingerprints in the car?
Car owner registration?
Squad car video?
i was thinking that too, but there were witnesses, so i assume the witnesses ID'd him as the shooter. But there is a possibility that he could have found someone that looked like him to murder.
Excellent observation kyle. Sounds like there were eyewitnesses but it sure would be nice to know they found the real perp.
Gun powder residue on the hands probably.
I would agree with the power residue among other possibilities.
Lisa--you need to get your head out of your self-righteous a--, and instead comment on a good man fulfilling his duty who was killed for no good reason two weeks before Christmas, and put yourself in that household of a widow and 5 children on Christmas morning instead of being the officially designated proof-reader for the world. You make me sick!!!
Lisa,
"proof reader of the Vine" Do you get that 5 children just lost their father???
Now that is one sick bitc*, comments about lower case and upper case on a vine when some Military veteran and father of 5 died at the hands of a lunatic.. completely at chance.. Lisa... your a real class act...
It's not Lisa I'm seeing here as the overly self-righteous one, but then it's so much fun to be full of self-satisfied indignation, isn't it? Makes us feel so superior, and hey, that's good for our self-esteem.
AG99 good post. some of those posts over lisa's proof reading are a little excessive...pot calling the kettle black sort of thing... lordy, are you people going to burn and stone her to death for it??? you do realize that that kind of over re-acting is what made this family loose there father dont you?? might want to think about that for a minute people.
Good one AG, I agree. What's with the name-calling and holier-than-thou attitude? She was just a little insensitive and not even offensive. Give me a break. I think you self-righteous people are scarier than her.
Why don't they release the name of the gunman?
becuase they want to INVESTGATE in every way psosbile before the family and friends are inundated by newshounds and idiots who think they have a right to every detail immediately.
GTR5, try reading beyond the headline.
They should not have released anybody's names, as not to "taint" the Investigation.
Presumption of guilt or innocence.
Also, if there WAS anyone else involved in all this, an accomplice, mentioning a name in the media means this accomplice has the chance to run, before the authorities come looking for them.
All I can say "Is this was not a random shooting?" when somebody walks up to a cruiser and commits murder. Much more to this story...
So true, Big Paul. it wasnt a gang related incident, there has to be more to this.
Ever heard of Occum's Razor? Things like this are not always a conspiracy--sometimes people do things for no apparent reason. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct one.
That is not an excuse to not investigate throughly.
Which seems to be the case here based on the comment of the Police Spokesperson, hours after this incident, instead of "No Comment":
We just have to wait for all the facts.
2 dead, dozens of victims. I suspect mental health an issue again - walking up to people and shooting them isn't sane behavior.
all murders involve dysfunctional behavior
Correct Rod,
Like voting for Obama "again"
Not necessarily. As with most things, depends on the circumstances.
Oh NO, lets not control guns in our society. Another NUT. But they all seem to get guns.
KEVIN you will note in this article, as in all others involving a shooting, there is no mention of the gun being a legally registered weapon or one bought illegally.
dont go to the ban guns argument as it will never happen and if guns are banned you can bet the farm it would not stop those that are willing to break any and all laws!
sorry for the familys loss.
Kevin,
There are way to many guns in America to ever be controlled, like that ever worked anyway. Better arm yourself dude and learn to shoot.
Anyone breaking in my home or jacking my car is in for a wild ride!!! I may still end up dead but at least I will have a somewhat fair chance..
Dano: The police officer wasn't armed?
GoSteelers: That's to bad, should have been I guess....That's my point in post #8.2
GoSteelers,
I read that article again. Where did you read that the officer was not armed?? I guess I missed that??
dano
Dano,
Is he asking that question rhetorically, trying to show that police carry guns, so why shouldn't the rest of us?
@GoSteelers-1249883 - The police officer wasn't prepared.
Oh, I guess he was Thanatos. The gun argument I guess will never be over. I am 64 and have been around guns all of my life. I prefer myself to be armed. The perp's will always have access to firearms.
Some people should not have access to guns, some should not drive, some should not have children. ETC.
I am very sorry for the children losing their father right here at Christmas..So sad..
Hey, gun control is working great in Mexico.
Dano,
I hear you! I too, lost a loved family member to a tragic crime at Christmastime. Shot by burglars. If he had a gun, he might have still been with us today. I did not own any myself then, but I do now. My children are taught gun safety and responsibility. I am a free man and will not have my dear freedom taken away from me!
You have to put "(sarcasm)" in front of that, some on Newsvine will believe that, and even use your post as a reference to win their irrational emotive arguement.
Dano: GoSteelers implication was that the police officer was armed yet still unable to protect himself.
Thanatos: Really? Rhetorically? He's making a point that an armed man can still get shot.
AW from KC: That was GoSteelers point.
Everyone, please refer yourselves to the FBI's report on fire weapons protection. It's interesting how ineffective a gun is at protecting onesself from an attacker. It's also interesting how dangerous a gun can be in a house with curious children wandering around.
And they will continue to obtain guns even if you have the most restrictive guns laws in existance. The key to the term "law abiding" is the law is honored in the first place. Criminals in all forms do not have honor! That's the point! I, for one, will never give up my 2nd Amendment RIGHT to keep and bear arms in my daily living. Better to be tried by 12 than to be carried by 6! It is true concealed carry is not a guarantee of your safety, but at least you have the option. Everything comes down to a choice...to draw or not. Unfortunately this brave officer was one of the unlucky ones. Perhaps if the driver he stopped was CCW the outcome would have been different. So many variables, too little space!
If you want to ban guns then you need a constitutional amendment to do so, as they did with prohibition (that one worked out real well, didn't it?). It will take 2/3rds of the states to ratify that to make it law. Because of the the constitution lawmakers can not arbitrarily make guns illegal.
That being said, if you allow just one of your rights to be taken away then where does it stop? There is no stopping point. The government will see the populace as sheep and take all rights away.
I for one do not and will not own a gun of any kind, and yes, I am former military.
But I will not accept the taking away of any right that is guaranteed by the constitution and the Bill of Rights. Our forefathers may never have envisioned automatic weapons, but they did understand that the populace has a right and a duty to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. We do have certain rights that have been given to us that we must defend or lose them.
And the argument that if all the guns were taken away that this would not happen is just a joke. If a criminal wants a weapon he/she will get one. If you outlaw guns then it will just be another item that will be smuggled into the country, just as drugs and and illegal aliens are.
If you think taking guns away is a sane thing to do then you are seriously mistaken. I have friends that use rifles, shotguns and other assorted weapons to put food on the table.
I may not believe in what you say, but I WILL defend to the death your right to say it. That is another right we have under the constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!
citzen and david,
the Meixican gangs are coming into the US to buy the guns and then smuggling them into Mexico.
HeyKevin, illeagl drugs ARE banned in the US. Has that helped to keep them away from people?
Since with that abbreviation (State Attorney. Lawyers, trained to win their arguments by any means, "errors of omissions" (Lying), Facts as Irrelevant, etc.) means you do not know any better (or are twisting Facts to meet your arguments). (While attached to US Law Enforcement I worked with FBI, DEA, ICE, etc.)).
What you fail to mention, are the factors (Facts), as the majority of US Citizens are NOT trained to safely use weapons, ever since the majority (92%) of US Citizens have Never Served in the US Military, unlike after WWII. As far as Firearms safety in relation to children, this is also the case as the parents were not, are not trained, so they cannot even teach their children (denial of parental responsibility, the US as a "No Fault Society")as even during the American Colonial days the children used "squirrel guns" to put fresh meat on the family table (back then with the short life span, children were anyone below double digits in age, adults were anyone with double digits in age. The concept of "teenagers" was much later.). These children were taught "responsibility" or suffered the consequences (an arse whooping, being told to go to the wood pile meant getting beaten by a big stick).
Because in the majority have Never Served in the US Military, only about 2% of US Citizens will use "Deadly Force" without hesitation even for self preservation. It is that hesitation that allows the criminal to inflict bodily harm or even take the firearm away.
You need to read the rest of the Unabridged FBI Report, instead of a Lawyer "Error of Omission", as well as the other FBI Reports Referenced by that FBI Report.
By the way what the f**k is a "fire weapons protection", (how I know you did not actually read the whole FBI Report).
Shows how much you know. Mexico has a license to manufacturer at Mexico M-16s, M-4s, M-9s, etc. for the Mexican Military. Why in the world would they want to spend more money buying these from the US (US Citizens with ATF Licenses, risk apprehensions by ICE or US Law Enforcement (including undercover), instead of just getting Fully Automatic weapons and ammunition from the Mexican Military much cheaper at lower risks (Juan "I lost my weapon sergeant". Sergeant, "Juan this is the fifth weapon you lost this week". Juan, "Sorry Sergeant". Sergeant, "I want my cut".). Also if that Mexican Military person does not give up his weapons, then dead, dead, dead (along with his family, relatives, etc.).
Do you even know the difference between Fully Automatic Weapons (Selective Fire) and Semi Automatic Weapons. And the requirements to even have a Fully Automatic Weapon at the US.
Also since you do not know, the US Department of State (same people actually responsible for "Fast and Furious") stated that tons of Chinese and Russian Federation weapons provided to Fundamentalist Islamic Iran are being shipped to the Hamas Foreign Fighters and Hezbollah at South and Central Americas. These weapons are going into Mexico via Guatemala. These more reliable weapons (AKMs, AK47s, SVDs, etc.) than M-16s, M-4s are preferred by the Mexican Drug Cartels.
You want to talk about onesy or twosy (thousands) and not tons (millions) of weapons and ammunition (Fully Automatic (selecitive fire) not available thru the US Civilians, except the US Politicians "direct from manufacturer" as "Fast and Furious".). You are looking at the flea on the elephant's arse and saying that the flea is the reason your living room smells like elephant, as the elephant in the middle of your living room squats to take a big sh!t and buckets of pee.
David you need to seek psychological help immediately. You sound like a looney tune gun rights advocate.
Once again, WHERE IS THE CRIME? America! Separation Church and State is SOOO COnstitutional! Hey REligious Fanatics! The Ten COmmandments are SOOO offensive, we can't allow them to be posted in our schools because someone might actually try to follow them, the shooter needs to be the hero, not the villian. Especially to you evolutionists. It's just natural selection. SOmeone who has a gun and satrts shooting is more superior than someone who does not and cowering behind a sofa! WHo;s the Religious Fanatic now?! Where is Madeline Murray O'Hare when you need her? We simply can;t have people following the sixth commandment of Thou Shalt Not Kill, that is too unconstitutional! Separate Church and State, let every murder go free, better leave that Democrapic Presidential nominee Sardozky, the one you caught with kids alone too, that's commandment 7. These far too outdated commandments! How FANATICAL!
Dumb post. We have laws that enforce these commandments, thou shall not kill...doesn't mean everyone will follow, even religious people commit murder
W H A T !!!!!!
Jason: You forgot to take your meds again, didn't you?
what a moron
Jason, imagine that, a crime in America was reported on msnbc. That must mean other countries (such as those who only use the ten commandments as their judicial system) have no crime at all. You need to follow GoSteelers advice and get on those psych meds! And in regards to your comment on evolution...thank you for proving that humans' origins are akin to that of a chimpanzee with your rant!
Shooting random people isn't "natural selection," especially when you kill yourself afterwards, natural selection is how we as a species rose above all others. Do some research. Atheistic countries have much lower crime rates than the US!
Dubbleyew - What's you source for that "fact"? I'm not sure there is even such a thing as an atheistic country.
This school had so much with the first shooting, and now this. I just hope they can heal from all of this. The only bit of irony I can find from this, the heads were at a meeting about the previous shooting for how late they were, and now they responded right away.
Makes you wonder why they didn't mention the gun being near the second "victim" yesterday in the article. I would have thought that a self inflicted gunshot wound would leave the gun very close to the victim. Does sound like there is more to this story. He walks directly up to the officer and shoots him? Yesterday it sounded as if the officer had pulled him over. I suppose facts come out slowly in these cases. My prayers go out to the officers family and friends.
Remember, people don't kill people, guns do ! And before that arrows killed people. And before that swords, and before that clubs and rocks killed people. It's NEVER the person holding these objects. We need to ban guns, like Washington DC did and what happenend after that, come on libs, its history your best friend. Oh wait, DC passed detroit to #1 in gun crimes because the lawful people had none. Sorry, I thought history was your friend. Its amazing how emotion based, history hating the lefties are, now lets go hate some rich people ! Their success is to blame for everything! Even wasteful gov. spending, but lets not fix that or even do reports on it.
Remember no weapons of mass destruction? then tell me what was in those trucks on CNN when Hans the inspector said, Once again we were denied access while trucks rolled out the back! Once again! wow, no wonder we never found any.
All true. That is why Fast and Furious is going nowhere in a hurry.
So, gun crimes in DC passed Detroit because those who "need" them didn't have them? Hmmm, sounds like your logic is a little flawed....with firearms, people should be able to protect themselves. Banning guns won't solve the problem, people need to be educated about proper firearm safety, etc. The only people who should not have guns are people with mental health issues and convicted criminals who return home after prison.
Gun freaks are too stupid to know when they are in agreement
I'm not a gun freak, just an American citizen who practices my Second Amendment.
What GoSteelers meant is that you're too dumb to know that "XDUMOCRAT" was being sarcastic...I think it's kinda obvious to anyone with a brain
Hey Anthony, you belong to a militia? I suggest you study up on the Second Amendment before claiming that you practice it.
no.. people kill people, always have, probably always will.... stop hating and being such a puppet to your masters............. your feaux news is showing
Sarcasm or not. The US Supreme Court Ruled the D.C. Anti Gun Laws Unconstitutional based on the Historical Perspective. (really says a lot about Detroit and Chicago, their Anti Gun Laws. Proven that only criminals (including corrupt law enforcement) have guns.).
As prior to the War of Independence (aka British "War at the Colonies") the first actions of British General Cornwallis and Henry Clinton (ancestor of Bill) was to seize the Colonists Militia's Armories (predecessors to the States National Guard). The Founding Fathers ("Colonist Rabble"), and Colonists Militia's considered as "Rebels", "Criminals", etc. fleeing to the haven of the "Rebellion", Pennsylvania; the reason for the Revolt, "Tax the Rich", "Rich Pay Their Fair Share" with the British Stamp Act, "Tea Taxes", as Taxes used to pay for the British Military that was oppressing the Colonists as well as paying for the rest of the British Empire (Colonies) and the Napoleonic Wars. (go look up why the Founding Fathers were not doing daily subsistance living like all the other colonists. Hint: In most cases you had to be the Rich in order to even get an Education back then. Instead of, even as a child having to slave on the farm, etc. versus getting an Education.).
The difference between the Colonists Militia and the "Minutemen" were that the Colonists Militia wore Uniforms, trained in European Conventional (Napoleonic) Warfare (stand in lines on an open declared battlefield) with the "Minutemen" being individuals as shopkeeps, merchants, farmers, fur traders, trappers, hunters, etc. that did not wear uniforms and fought using "Unconventional Warfare" (Asymmetric Warfare).
After the Colonists Militias fled to Pennsylvania with the Founding Fathers, as hunted by the British Loyalists, Bounty Hunters, British Regulars, etc., it was the "Minutemen" that held off the British Regulars (Military) until the First Continental Army could be formed (a bunch of the Founding Fathers arguing about the cost, who should Command, the possibility of a later Military Dictatorship, and even arguing against fighting the British Empire).
So based on the fact that the Founding Fathers knew that the Colonists Militia and the "Minutemen" were two separate entities, as the Colonists Militia " well regulated militia" (defeated even before the start of the War), and the "Minutemen" as Individuals that owned guns "the right of the people" that stopped the defeat of the War of Independence by the British before even starting is why the US Supreme Court Ruled against the D.C. Anti Gun Laws. Also considered were the numbers of cases of individuals using legally owned "firearms" in "self defense".
Some of you need to read the early Congressional Records, you would be laughing your arses off. After the War of Independence, we almost ended up with a King George (Washington). The Founding Fathers thought that this title was too similar to the British King George III and the Colonist would question their sanity.
So much for you being an Attorney. Second Amendment, "well regulated militia". And US Supreme Court Ruling pertaining to " well regulated militia" and "the right of the people" as individuals, not of the "well regulated militia", as individual Constitutional Right of firearms ownership.
ban handguns now
If one considers the fact that the majority of D.C. is a very heavily patrolled area due to governmental facilities and only consider the area which receives normal police protection the murder rates in D.C. have surpassed even the supposedly worst cities for a very long time.
guns don't kill people, people kill people, guns just make the job easier. IF you ban firearms (handguns mainly) how will we be able to defend our selfs from those who have them?
"gun free zones" work so GOOD. we should have more of them.
Pete: The officer wasn't armed?
Or even if he was, he was preoccupied with the traffic stop. How many police officers do you know that would have their firearm prepped in case someone walks up to their car to shoot them?
No dead ones.
Police officers don't worry about or consider every day that someone will walk up to their car and shoot them. Please get your head checked.
17 deleted, lost thread, began with ltcommander72 derailing about pepper spray. Write your own article.
the cop shot him and there covering it up shoot a cop and theyll hunt you down and shoot to kill who is going to tell
I knew the gun control freaks would come out of the woodwork...here's all I'm going to say: guns don't kill people, people kill people. Guns make it easier. And honestly, it's not surprising that the officer was killed was unable to return fire. If he was preoccupied with having this person pulled over, I guarantee his attention was focused on the person who was pulled over, not having his firearm out to return fire at someone. A shooting is never good, especially on a college campus like Virginia Tech. Thankfully this gunman decided to end it himself before something happened like 2007. My thoughts are with the Crouse family.
No doubt a lot of effort will be expended in an attempt to "explain" this person's actions, to "understand" his motivations, to "explore" his issues...
And, heck, maybe that's valid, but I'm not sure, as a practical matter, that it adds much to our useful fund of knowledge compared to those days when idiots like this gunmen would have simply been characterized as "murderous @ssholes". Does it really help to know that he had a narcissistic personality disorder (which, I'd propose, most of these deranged killers have)? There are really only two groupings that matter: (1) Fit for society; and (2) Not fit for society. This guy was #2. He needed flushed.
Another event brought to you by the boys at NRA. They promote the proliferation of handguns with the malice that"Gawd wants me to have a gun" and "guns don't kill people, that boy could have used a spoon to kill that cop". They also have the misdirected lie that guns are used for self-defense. Statistically this is a bold faced lie and they know it. Need proof, the cop that was murdered had a gun.... It is no accident that this happened in a state with some of the most lenient gun laws in the country. Usually the legally purchased guns are exported to criminals in other states. I am sure the bozos will attack me but I am ex-law enforcement, have trained thousands of law enforcement officers, trained with SWAT, interviewed scores of murderers and treated gunshot victims. I know more about gunshot violence that they will know in 10 lifetimes. They just know the lies and propaganda they use to subvert our Constitution. See the picture of the man covered in a sheet, the NRA put him there.
So.....how's your left wing propaganda taste?
So no counter-argument, just calling it propaganda?
@Anthony, Its law enforcement propaganda. If you consider that left wing then you need to reconsider.
I've just read a lot of assertions, Moe (btw, how are Larry, Curly and Shemp?), but no references to supporting data, other than your claimed personal expertise. That's pretty bold, considering how sparse the facts in this case are.
I would propose, frankly, that the problem has less to do with 2nd Amendment rights than with the Supreme Court's decision, back in the 1970's, that crazy people must be accorded the same rights as sane people, even when they are utterly incapable of exercising them. The "Homeless Crisis" of the 1980's wasn't the result of Reaganomics, it was the result of the wholesale closure of State Mental Institutions, in response to that ruling, and the dumping of their wards onto the streets. We no longer have any practical means of getting people with murderous rages into treatment, save on showings of "imminent danger", a proof which is pretty hard to adduce before those murderous rages have already expressed themselves. The "4/16" Virginia Tech shooter is an utterly classic example of how it all goes wrong.
And that's the problem - the Supreme Court was utterly right on the Constitutional issue, but Constitutional law is a blunt instrument, unable to accommodate subtleties and idiosyncracies and seldom consistent with practical realities. Anti-gunners, such as yourself, are just as inflexible and doctrinaire and likely just as wrong in your proposed solution. The experience of the UK and Australia is informative on that issue. You will seek to remove guns (effectively removing them only from the law abiding), while leaving the real problem untouched and unresolved. This murderous twit did not emerge from nowhere and, until we address the real issue, well, I doubt that gun bans will achieve much good (don't stand too near the subway tracks because crazies don't need a gun to push you off the edge).
@ fart, You are wrong. This is not a Constitutional issue it is a political issue. The Court backs gun control. Pure simple and easy to see. Real information can be found at websites of graduate schools of epidemiology, cdc.gov. However, I did not offer facts, I offered the rantings of the NRA. You read what those fools say and you will find my comments to be correct. The prior shooter got his guns in a state where anyone can buy too many guns without real back ground checks regardless of mental capacity.
Moe, I'm rather amazed. Most officers I come in contact with who find that I have a concealed carry license tend to commend me on my wisdom, and some have even made comments to the effect that if their badge didn't give them license to carry, then they'd go through the same process I did and get the license. So to hear comments such as yours from someone claiming to be ex-law enforcement truly surprises me.
I've certainly never had any of them act shocked, surprised or appalled that a plain citizen should actually have the ability to protect themself, and these are reactions from officers in 3 separate states (TX, AL and OK). And none of them as has even hinted that I had exercised poor judgment in acquiring the license, the training and the weapon. I actually own several handguns and more than one long gun, and all that I've ever acquired I can account for and can assure you are all in the hands of persons legally permitted to own weapons.
Once again, my most sincere condolences to Officer Crouse's family and loved ones.
@Moe: So Mr. EX-Law Enforcement: While it is true that the officer was armed, when was the last time you were ready to shoot someone who just walked up to your patrol car when your attention was probably focused on writing a traffic citation, as this officer was probably doing. How do you distinguish between an armed subject and the average citizen who might simply being walking up to you to ask for directions? Do you draw down on anyone who approaches you? Just curious to know how someone with your massive amount of experience would've handled this situation? Because it was obvious to me, based on the story, that this officer was ambushed. Whether or not the officer had a gun was irrelevent.
all i have to say is i am glad you are an EX-LAWMAN
@Dubbleyew: no, there's no need for a counter-argument. You can't rationalize with the people who can't see the other side of things.
kinda like you, huh, Anthony?
If you want to ban guns then you need a constitutional amendment to do so, as they did with prohibition (that one worked out real well, didn't it?). It will take 2/3rds of the states to ratify that to make it law. Because of the the constitution lawmakers can not arbitrarily make guns illegal.
That being said, if you allow just one of your rights to be taken away then where does it stop? There is no stopping point. The government will see the populace as sheep and take all rights away.
I for one do not and will not own a gun of any kind, and yes, I am former military.
But I will not accept the taking away of any right that is guaranteed by the constitution and the Bill of Rights. Our forefathers may never have envisioned automatic weapons, but they did understand that the populace has a right and a duty to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. We do have certain rights that have been given to us that we must defend or lose them.
And the argument that if all the guns were taken away that this would not happen is just a joke. If a criminal wants a weapon he/she will get one. If you outlaw guns then it will just be another item that will be smuggled into the country, just as drugs and and illegal aliens are. If you think taking guns away is a sane thing to do then you are seriously mistaken. I have friends that use rifles, shotguns and other assorted weapons to put food on the table.
I may not believe in what you say, but I WILL defend to the death your right to say it. That is another right we have under the constitution!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Simple way to end this argument.
Detroit and Chicago. Where only the criminals (including the law enforcement on the take) and the rest of the Civilians are victims.
i can't imagine what that family will go thru on christmas day..but im hoping they will hold each other very close and remember the husband,the father he was to his family and rejoice the time spent with him....sending a group hug that includes me...........this other wise has left me speechless.........
There are mentally ill people walking the streets all around you every day. Sometimes they make it through their day without attracting too much attention, and sometimes they make national news. This officer was trained in defense tactics and firearms use, but none of that does much good when somebody walks up out of the blue with gun in hand and shoots you in the head while you are in a seated position conducting routine business. He never knew what hit him. As a former police officer I've seen more than my share of evil. I feel for his family, friends, and fellow officers. Rest in peace brother.
Not releasing the gunman's name because he's a white man, if he was black, by now news media would be at his 2nd cousins on his mama's side house and they would be wondering what the hell is going on.
For the love of God, can't you save your trolling for another post? Two people have DIED! Take your cynicism elsewhere.
They're not releasing his name because it's routine to verify identification and notify the next of kin before releasing the information.
accept for the two dickheads at Columbine, and the two dirtbags armed to the teeth that duked it out with the cops in California....isn't it almost always a loner that decides to go full retard?
They seldom do it alone. They have the NRA as accomplices. The NRA makes sure there are way too many handguns in America and the fight very hard to make sure that criminals get them by fighting every gun control idea. They are dimwitted and easily led by their propaganda machine. The claim the gun is used for self defense (lol), that it is a Gawd given right (rofl) and Americans need the guns to protect themselves form the government ( just plain stupid). So now you know, most murderers have help from the NRA.
Thats dumb making them illegal isn't going to stop people from having them. It will just cost more money in regulating (less make money in taxing the purchase of accountable adults to purchase). Just like drugs they are illegal but anyone who wants them can get them. Lets make more laws to enforce..... or just hope people who aren't crazy don't go shooting everyone up!!!
Moe! I don't know about you ,but if someone breaks in to my house i will protect my home and family.That person will die.If someone comes up to me pointing a gun.He better be damn quick.I have a cwp,and i will kill him.I didn't have a family to see them or me die at the hands of a murderer.Criminals will always find a way to get firearms to commit thier crimes.I will have a firearm to protect my family and myself.Guess what Moe?I don't belong to the NRA.Oh by the way! I have a right as a father to protect the ones I love and provide for. Moe Get a Life.
@ American, all you are going to do if someone puts a gun in your face is poop in your pants and cry like a baby. Just like most people. Even in war time 25-30% of soldiers shoot wildly or don t shoot at ll because of two things; the are scared and they don t want to kill anyone. If you have a gun in your home it is much more likely to be used to kill a family member, a pet or yourself. The way criminals find guns is because the NRA promotes the proliferation of guns. Then the guns get sold to criminals or stolen by criminals. People that are normal; and I am not saying your are normal by any means, that do kill someone are usually ravaged with guilt, even when the shooting is justified. Additionally I made no comment about guns being illegal but there should be real gun control, guns that leave a signature on the shell casing, and if you buy a gun that is used in a crime you get convicted of the crime. I know you folks doubt my experiences because you seem to have zero experience with criminals, law enforcement, criminology, understanding criminal behavior.
Moe-375548
@ American, all you are going to do if someone puts a gun in your face is poop in your pants and cry like a baby.
Maybe so, Moe, but I'll tell ya this much: In that situation, I'd have to change my underwear and dry my tears....after two in the chest/one in the head to the perp. What would you do? Freeze up and become another statistic? Become a part of the balance Moe and maybe there wouldnt be so many deviants sticking guns in peoples faces. Hmmmm.....? And as far as experience goes, many of my students are current/former LE and military personnel. I guess that counts towards experience, eh?
Moe! you don't know me but believe this if you are one to break in my house.You better have your affairs in order.I have no problem what so ever about pulling a trigger,and i don't miss.I have also taught my son to protect himself, which i hope never happens.I have seen my fair share of dead people.Oh and by the way i helped send a career criminal away for life.I myself think the bastard should have been shot just to save the state expense to house him. SO STFU IDIOT.
Your opinion is allowed but you know what they say about opinions.
Feeling guilty is FAR better than being dead.
Anthony, I agree with you, also carry a gun with C.W.P. When people in the general public dont have firearms for protection, the criminals know that, Dont know why you would say flawed logic. Not only do the numbers support this, I saw documentories about criminals in prison saying they dont care what the laws are, they will carry a gun. Guess thats why they are criminals. My point is outlawing guns works just like outlawing drugs, and we all know how that war is working out.
I'm glad you at least agree with me.
Work of the well regulated militia......
Back under your bridge, troll.
Obama 2012!
LOL,No chance in Hel- Komrade Right
Are you talking about Bummer Obama? ... Reach for the toilet paper!
I am a Virginia Tech student. I was in the dining hall within eyesight of the shooting when the alert went out and the entire campus went to lockdown. Scary as hell. I know a lot of people who lived in the area during the VT massacre and this brought up a lot of unpleasant memories, but I do want to say that - as a student - the university did everything right when handling this situation and making sure the students were safe. So I hope no one tries to claim that Virginia Tech is incompetant... we're just very unlucky.
And I'm begging you commenters not to turn this into an anti-gun rage. There's a time and a place for that, but this is not it. Please, let's all just join together in offering our prayers and condolences to the officer's family and even the family of the shooter. It's going to be quite a shock for everyone and the entire campus is grieving.
Go in peace, Officer Crouse.
I'm a resident of Blacksburg and am also employed here. As part of the Hokie Nation, I am honored to be the first to respond to your post. No matter what the circumstances, there will be those who just can't resist turning the issue into a political, racial or religious rant. Lost is the ability for most just to say, I'm sorry for your loss, grieve a little inside for the family of the slain, and even for the family of the shooter.