This tragedy is about a disturbed individual with major social problems.

If guns were outlawed as you propose he would have still found some way to obtain guns or used another method of destruction with possibly an even worse loss of life such as a bomb. Gun control won’t stop disturbed individuals like Cho from killing people, but understanding why he felt the way he did to act the way he did will.

As far as handguns, hunters use them all the time, not only for backup for archery but also when an animal such as a boar or bear is charging you and for something as simple as turkey hunting.

I think the right to bear arms was so people could protect themselves from intruders domestic and international and hunting was just a bonus. Now the theme is it should only be used for hunting and I think that is wrong.

My sister in laws husband was shot and killed by a robber of their home several years ago. If he had a gun when that robbery took place would he still be alive today? Maybe, maybe not, but he damn sure would have had a better chance.

That’s my take on gun control, and with that said, I have yet to jump out of bed carrying my guns to see what all the ruckus is about. Lucky for me all the searches have turned up animals causing the distrubances, but if a human was involved I would have gone back for the guns, not only for me, but my family too.