Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow op-ed arrow The Virginia Tech Massacre
Apr 17 2007
The Virginia Tech Massacre | Print |  E-mail
Op_ed
By Greg Palast   

Translation

The Accomplices: Sundance George and Butch Reid
by Greg Palast

Ben Heine / MWC NEWS
Ben Heine / MWC NEWS
He had accomplices. Don’t kid yourself: 23-year-old Cho Seung-hui didn’t forge his two little pistols in his smithy shop.

He had a dealer, a guns-and-bullets pusher-man who put the heat in his hand, took the kid’s money and pocketed it with a grin.

“Whether you are looking for a pistol for affordable training or simply the excitement of shooting, the P22 is the pistol for you!”

That’s the ad on the Walther website for the student-reaper, a Walther .22.

Not that Walther, or its fellow murder-maker, Glock, which crafted the other Weapon of Student Mass Destruction, the Glock 7mm, kept all of the killer kid’s money. The gun makers religiously tithe a portion of their grim reapings to their friends in Washington.

This report isn’t about gun control legislation or the right to bear arms or any of that sideways crap. This is about a group of co-conspirators who dropped two killing devices into the hands of someone who shouldn’t have had access to a plastic spoon.

But before we bring in the suspects for questioning, let’s pull back the camera lens for the bigger picture. Because what we saw at Virginia Tech was just a concentrated node of a larger, nationwide killing spree that goes on day after day in the USA. Eighty-thousand Americans take a bullet from a hand gun in any year. Thirty-thousand die. That’s one thousand shooting deaths off-camera for each victim at Virginia Tech.

Sundance Bush is right now at the school for his photo op. The President is, “saddened and angered by these senseless acts of violence.” But will our senseless and violent President do anything about it? He already has: On July 29, 2005, the US Senate passed, then Bush signed, a grant of immunity from lawsuits for Walther, Glock and other gun manufacturers.

Now, corporations that make hand-guns can’t be sued for knowingly selling firearms to killers. Like that? No other industry has such wide lawsuit immunity — not teachers, not doctors, not cops — only gun makers.

Here’s how Cho got his guns. It’s a story you won’t hear on CNN. It begins with something known as, The Iron Pipeline. At one end of the Pipeline are states like Alabama where gun laws are loosey-goosey. Gun makers including Glock stuff the ‘Bama end of the pipe with far more guns than can ever be bought legally in that state, knowing full well that the guns will be illegally shipped up the pipeline into states where gun laws are tougher. Virginia law prevents “gun-trafficking”; in Alabama, they could care less. Image

In every state in America, a bar owner is liable to lawsuit if a bartender serves too many drinks and a customer dies in an auto accident. Hand a chainsaw to a child, you’re in legal trouble. Until Bush signed the 2005 protect-the-gun-makers law, the same common law against negligent distribution applied to firearms.

Bush was aiming at Stephen Fox. Steven can describe feeling pieces of his brain fly from his skull after a mugger shot him. He’s permanently paralyzed. A jury charged the makers of .25-caliber hand guns with negligent distribution — and Bush went wild.

He was especially worked up because the City of New Orleans sued the gun makers for the cost of hospitalizing cops shot by armaments pooping out the end of the Iron Pipeline. The NAACP joined in the suit with the effrontery to demand the gun-pushers alter their marketing programs to keep their products out of the hands of maniacs and murderers.

Do the gun manufacturers know their .22’s are being used for something other than hunting long-horned elk? Every year, the federal Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agency sends 800,000 requests to the gun companies to trace weapons found at crime scenes. As Fox’s attorney told me, criminals are a much-valued, if unpublicized, market segment sought out and provisioned by these manufacturers.

But they’re safe, the gun-makers, even if we aren’t, because of Bush’s immunity law. But Sundance Bush didn’t act alone. There was Harry ‘Butch’ Reid, leader of the Senate Democrats, riding shotgun on the immunity bandwagon.

The Walther .22 comes from Austria. Hitler came from Austria, too. The Glock 7mm student-slayer comes from Germany. With the legal protection handed them by Bush and Reid, the two Teutonic weapons profiteers can skip free of legal judgment with that line well-practiced by their countrymen: “We were only taking orders — for our product.”

Greg Palast is the author of Armed Madhouse : Who's Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal '08 and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War. NY Times Bestseller


Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 2614

Comments (18)
RSS comments
1. 18-04-2007 20:18
Every time some nutcase goes out and kills people that becomes secondary to the agenda-driven item that is gun control. You have uninformed people talking about, what we should do about weapons. Appears that most folks that came in contact with this killer knew he was nutz, but political correctness protected his rights which resulted in 32 or 33 deaths.  
 
The murders on the Virginia Tech campus, the worst such rampage in our history, might have been mitigated if just one member of the faculty or a student had the means to return fire. The Virginia Tech murders confirm the value of empowering ordinary citizens to carry a concealed weapon. How many must die before political correctness is left on the ash can of history.
Guest
june
2. 19-04-2007 13:07
one way or the other the profeteers win...black market= inflated prices, white market = they litterally make a killing, what do you do, I agree if wakos have access to guns, everyone else should have one to deal with them, but like driving, they should take a workshop and earn their gun with practice, it\'s only theirs when they consistently get the bull\'s eye, that\'s how I would do it.  
A level playing field sounds more fair, let them have it until hopefully everybody gets tired of allways carrying extra clonk...but these things are also addictive, one may feel naked without his/her weapon when used to have one, even when they never have to use it...damn humans! f...complicated wako species...and bad at math...
Guest
3. 20-04-2007 02:19
nullnullCriminals can and will always get their hands on guns---gun control or not. No, the gun manufacturers should not be sued or blamed. We all need to purchase and learn how to use guns properly for our own protection.
Guest
sessitsnt@yahoo.comNOSPAM! ">Nesta Smith
4. 20-04-2007 05:52
walther 22.
Greg Palast do you not realize that the Walther .22 was not made to hunt long-horned elk?
Guest
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
5. 20-04-2007 21:36
walther 22.
There is a lot of misleading and agenda-driven remarks that fail to see one point: criminals dont follow laws-so making laws on top of laws does not work. It is alread Ilegal to kill a person [without valid 'exemption'] so there you go. That is all you need. If you dont listen to that law, what makes you think they will listen to some other law? 
 
As stated earlier, yeah, i just can WONDER how many LESS people would have been killed if everyone who is responsible enough to have a gun HAD ONE there. 
 
When you see an event like this happen, the response should not be "oh no- we need to get rid of guns" but "more people need to have guns" 
 
remember - gun control HELPS the criminals and HINDERS the law-abiding. Is that what you really want? Guns dont kill people it is the user of it. 
 
More people have been killed by a car than a gun. If your agenda is to stop 'killing' of people, then you should START by getting rid of all the cars, since that apears to be the logic of the anti-gun - just get rid of the guns. Why not get rid of all the cars then? Yeah, stupid and nonsense, but it is the logic the pro-guncontrol folks out there use. 
 
The best answer to this type of problem is EDUCATION not CONTROLL. Granted it should be harder for criminals to get a gun, it should be EASY for other folks to get one. (You aint going to prevent a criminal from getting a gun, you simply CANT). Knowing that, lets have the GOOD FOLKS out there who are responsible law-abiding people learn the truth about guns, how to use them properly, and HAVE AND USE THEM. THAT, my friend, is the best way to handle thugs such as cho. If half the students had a 45 on them, you think he would have done what he did? Guns PREVENT way more crimes than guns used in crimes. Rememeber that too.
Guest
rickard
6. 20-04-2007 21:47
Re= Rickard
Read the #2 Comment here
Guest
Shahram
7. 20-04-2007 21:56
re=
The guns used in the killings were semiautomatic pistols, which let the shooter do the most amount of damage in the shortest amount of time — in this case, just a minute or two. The Glock's magazine held 15 rounds, which would have been illegal under the 1994 federal assault-weapons ban that expired under a Republican Congress in 2004, thanks largely to the NRA lobby. Yet the NRA still defends every imaginable weapon. The NRA's national convention in St. Louis just wrapped up on Sunday, less than 24 hours before the bloodbath in Blacksburg. Convention-goers were even given tips on how to conceal handguns. How quaint. Perhaps if the NRA leadership is available this week, they should go to Virginia Tech and explain to the parents of the dead and wounded why these weapons are so necessary.
Guest
me
8. 21-04-2007 00:20
re=
Guns are nessessary because there are evil people out there and there needs to be as little as possible to hinder a good person to be able to stop them. The VA tech is just one more example of how law enforcement cant do it all and how it would have been better if the public is educated about how to properly use and carry guns, and the said shall, as constitutionally protected [yet illegally broken by state laws] go UNinfringed. Why do you think law enforcement have guns? In order to be effective with carrying a gun you need education and that is what is not provided to the general public. Its garbage non-sense by agenda-driven anti-gunners that just dont understand the problem, and even more so, how to deal with it. Its just like California and their so-called ecologists that favor coal plants and then at the same time complain about the stuff that is from them, when it could be all eliminated to begin with by using nuclear plants. Sheer nonsense people misguinding people is all that is at hand here. 
 
You think the thug would use a 2 round magazine if you limited it by law to that? You are crazy. That is like CA banning 50 BMG rifles because 'terrorists will get ahold of them'. Geee....CA is just so safe now because they dont have to worry about any terrorist getting ahold of one. And just in case bin laden happens to get it somewhere else, the people of ca are so safe now because he wont be able to use it there. You must remember one point here...criminals, by defintion, dont obey laws. You cant stop someone like Cho with laws. Get it? Got it? Good. Now lets see what will work in preventing another phychopath from killing a bunch of innocent people as easily as was done. Going after what the thugs use wont stop them. But if I and my 45 crossed paths with one of them, i will try and bring him down, and you bet your xxx you will be glad i did if you were there and were the thugs next target.
Guest
rickard
9. 21-04-2007 01:02
re
Quote:
But if I and my 45 crossed paths with one of them, i will try and bring him down, and you bet your xxx you will be glad i did if you were there and were the thugs next target

 
 
That's the attitude which gets you kill in three seconds flat. 
 
You can not defy the law of physic, if someone decides to shoot you you won't have a time to say cat in the hat boy. 
 
Real life is much different from the movies. Get it? Got it? Good
Guest
Shahram
10. 21-04-2007 03:22
re
The last sentence was correct but the rest...not too valid. 
 
If i got shot at without knowing anything before yeah id be shot. But then someone else would be able to get the thug. And if it was not me who was shot but someone else, or I see it before it happens, I want to and will do what is needed to bring the thug down. If you think thats for the movies, go watch another one along with some more kool-aid. 
Thugs usually are not really dumb (some are though) - they know that guns dont kill its the user. They are not afraid of guns. They are not afraid of someone who has a gun. They are afraid of someone with a gun and knows how to use it. And WILL use it. You can put me in the catagory of can and will. You can be with those who dont even want to have the ability to defend your self because being able to stop evil would be evil itself. You should benefit by reading Deuteronomy. And while you are at it with going after Glock...better go after Ford first. They made devices that have killed more people than Glock did. But atleast there is a bill to prevent that or it would have been tried and has been. Its not there for Ford because there are not any nuts to try such nonsense. But there are for the guns. It aint the guns brother, its the evil inside the indivual. And that evilness doesn\'t follow laws. And also remember that those retched instruments are also utilized against evil. They are not anti-peace. They are pro-peace. That is why peace officers carry them. But they are able to be used to the contrary but it is the user who chose to do such not the device.
Guest
rickard
11. 21-04-2007 14:49
re=
Quote:
They are not afraid of someone who has a gun. They are afraid of someone with a gun and knows how to use it. And WILL use it. You can put me in the catagory of can and will. You can be with those who dont even want to have the ability to defend your self because being able to stop evil would be evil itself. You should benefit by reading Deuteronomy. And while you are at it with going after Glock...better go after Ford first.

 
 
I don't see any relevency between guns and cars. Yes both maybe deadly but cars has not been made for offencive purposes. Spoon also could be deadly but it is not weapon of destruction. 
 
Because based on this logic, one could say then why not legalize bombs? Bomb kills less then cars or alcohol in US. 
 
PS: This has nothing to do with evil and your fight between good and bad. By simplify and dehumanizing this you only ignore and overlook the root of the problem. Therefore it's doom to repeat itself.
Guest
Shahram
12. 21-04-2007 15:11
Other cases
Dr. Polya of Media With Conscience in his latest article ( US mass murder )says: 
 
Quote:
After the horrendous Port Arthur Massacre in my home state of Tasmania (April 28, 1996; 35 victims killed) the conservative Coalition Australian Federal Government passed powerful Gun Control Laws – 700,000 guns were taken out of circulation by a buy-back and destruction program and tightly-regulated gun use was confined to the Emergency and Security Services, farmers and sporting shooters.  
 
and few lines down 
 
Since the introduction of Federal Australian Gun Control Laws in 1996, the annual gun-related deaths (from suicide, homicide and accidents) has roughly HALVED and there have been no further massacres. A study by the University of Sydney, published last December in the international research journal Injury Prevention, found that by 2002-03, Australia's rate of 2.7 firearm-related homicides per million of population had dropped to one-fifteenth that of the United States.

 
 
See: US mass murder
Registered
13. 23-04-2007 22:28
article/2 new VT tribute songs
It seems like more than a one-man job to me. 
 
Too bad this killer wasn't aware of just how out of touch with reality he really was.  
 
My comments are contained in the following tribute songs I wrote to express my deepest sympathies for those who lost loved ones in this tragedy: 
 
Today in Virginia 
Dr BLT's One Man "Banned" 
words and music by Dr BLT (c) 2007 
http://www.drblt.net/music/TinV.mp3 
 
Virginia's Tears 
Dr BLT's One Man "Banned" 
words and music by Dr BLT (c) 2007 
http://www.drblt.net/music/VT.mp3 
 
Dr BLT: Singer/songwriter/psychologist
Guest
drblt@drblt.netNOSPAM! ">Dr BLT
14. 01-05-2007 23:48
Sr. Subcontracts Manager
Jeez I can't believe how some people can be so stupid!!! Some people connect two things as if it were law. How does selling firearms legally result in some idiot kid massacaring his classmates? It doesn't. This idiot that wrote this article is claiming that the gun makers should be held responsible. Well cars kill more americans every year but we don't think they should be banned, right? Let's not be stupid. Some people just are not right in the head and we need to focus on identifying those people so that they don't do crazy stuff like this.
Guest
james.avila@ngc.comNOSPAM! ">james avila
15. 02-05-2007 00:28
re=
Quote:
Well cars kill more americans every year but we don't think they should be banned, right?

 
 
Yes, I guess the primary purpose of car is to kill and destroy like gun. 
 
And you have audacity to call anyone stupid?
Guest
Shahram
16. 02-05-2007 00:35
stupidity
Why do some people think they are educated when in reality they have no common sense? How can someone with the least bit of noodles in their head think that it is more important to blame a piece of metal (gun) rather than trying to find out why this evil bastard decided to kill his classmates? Guns don't just pick themselves up and start shooting people!! 
 
Do you know that every high school student in Israel carries a gun and M16's to school (and yes even girls)? And do you know how many school shootings they've had? ZERO. I wonder why that is. If the idiot anti-gun people think that just because people have access to guns that they automatically start killing each other then they need to look at countries where most people carry guns and they don't kill each other. Switzerland is another example. Every male over 18 is required to own a machine gun and how many school shootings and post office shootings have they had in their history? ZERO. Get real.
Guest
james.avila@ngc.comNOSPAM! ">james avila
17. 08-05-2007 15:15
Hello! From Switzerland!!
Just to point out some inaccuracies in your generally good article. 
 
It was a Glock 19, not a 7mm, there is no such thing as a Glock 7mm. The Glock 19 which was used fires a 9x19mm 'Lugar' or Parabelluem round, and it is manufactured in Austria, not Germany. 
 
The Walther P22 is manufactured in Germany, not Austria and fires a small .22 round, mainly used for pest control. 
 
james.avila@ngc.com, you cannot compare Switzerland with the United States, the laws governing firearms are much more strict in Switzerland, which if you compare to the rest of Europe where gun control is even more strict, you will find it stands out like a sore thumb in terms of much higher gun violence anyway. Firstly Switzerland requires compulsory conscription into its armed forces, and a proper militia, and secondly that “machine gun” which is in fact an assault rifle can only be kept at home in a sealed gun cabinet along with a sealed box of ammunition which is checked regularly and periodically by your local militia sergeant. If you do not fulfil these requirements, it is confiscated from you and placed into you’re local barracks for safe keeping. Private ownership of firearms isn’t a “right” like in the United States. You need to apply for a license. You cannot just walk into a shop and purchase a gun and bingo after a brief background check that’s all. You need a GOOD REASON for a gun, self defence and hunting, unless you are a member of a gun club is not a valid reason, and even then you will be severely restricted in what calibre of ammunition you can buy. You need to be fingerprinted and cleared through a police interview, and preferably need a psychiatric evaluation and compulsory 5 people who can vouch for you fit and mental health, and who can state unequivocally that they see no reason why you SHOULDN’T possess a gun, they also cannot be members of your family or extended family, as that consent is illegitimate, people vouching must be over the age of 21, have a full permanent address, no criminal record, excluding driving offences, must be citizens or nationals of Switzerland and provide signed consent. 
 
Cho would not have passed any of the requirements under Swiss law to obtain a firearm, and remember you have to be a NATIONAL or a Citizen of Switzerland, not a foreign student with a ‘green card.’ And despite this, there are more gun related deaths in Switzerland then say other European countries of bigger and similar sizes, especially gun related suicides, compare this other countries such as Greece, Spain or France and it’s not good, but its better then the United States at least. Take is from me, I’m Swiss. 
 
I apologise for my poor English skills. 
 
Au revoir!
Guest
Philip
18. 08-05-2007 16:33
Response to Phillip from Switzerland
Phillip, I appreciate you clarifying the laws in Switzerland. The point I am trying to make is that guns themselves do not kill people. People with severe problems kill people. Our idiotic peace lovers here in the United States love to put the blame on material objects and they don't try to find the root cause. For example, the idiots in this country want to sue the tobacco companies for causing cancer instead of blaming the idiots that actually smoke the product.  
 
Another thing is that in the US machine gun and submachine gun ownership is also very restricted. Only submachine guns and machine guns manufactured prior to 1986 can be legally owned by an individual. A machine gun was made after 1986 it can only be owned by a law enforcement agency or military and government agencies. Even the pre-86 machine guns are restricted and the ATF has to approve transfers of those weapons. They run fingerprints and background checks through the FBI before they approve a transfer. This is where I'm going with this. These restrictions only affect the law abiding citizens who are not the ones killing people. The criminals could care less about gun laws as they have their own black market system. 
 
So for those peace lovers and tree huggers, gun control laws only affect law abiding citizens and do nothing to control the illegal gun trade and the associated violence.
Guest
james.avila@ngc.comNOSPAM! ">James Avila

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Greg Palast Virginia Tech
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: