Quote:
Quote by: Osborn F Enready  Chos problems started in the home, and were TAKEN to the school. It had nothing to do with guns, except he chose guns to execute his plan of murder suicide instead of a homemade bomb. |
Interesting you should mention bombs. Did you know that in the Irish troubles quite a few IRA members lost their lives building bombs? Another interesting fact, the most deadly bombing of the entire troubles occured in Omagh in 1998, and was a 500lb car bomb. The bomb killed less people than Cho did (29 as opposed to Cho's 32), and was made, planned and executed by 'professional' (for lack of a better word) practised terrorists.
It seems highly unlikely that Cho would have been able to produce such a massive bomb and deploy it as successfuly. It is far more likely that he would have been like the deranged neo-Nazi bomber David Copeland, who used multiple nail bombs but eventually killed only three people.
Based on this fact, is it not a reasonable conclusion that had Cho been unable to use the efficient tools that are guns and been forced to use the considerably more dangerous (to himself) and much less efficient tool that is the home made bomb, then it is doubtfull that he would have been anywhere near as prolific a killer as managed to be with guns?
Quote:
So? Who cares what it is designed for?
What matters is what it can do. A gun is designed to fire bullets. Punish people for making those bullets go through people.
Punishment for the ownership of an instrument is idiotic.
|
In that case, should the FBI come across a home containing the materials to construct say a 'dirty bomb' then would you not have them confiscate them and try the owner under terrorism laws, because after all a dirty bomb is just an 'instrument'?