Author Topic: How long was it before they blamed movies  (Read 584 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

How long was it before they blamed movies
« on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:42:45 PM »
From sky news

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1261402,00.html

Police believe the Virginia gunman may have been copying scenes from a film when he carried out his killing spree.

Detectives say Cho Seung-Hui repeatedly watched the South Korean movie Oldboy in the days leading up to the massacre in which 32 people were killed.

The film's themes of obsession and revenge also occur in Cho's own writings. 

In a chilling video sent by the student to the American TV network NBC he appears to re-enact scenes from the movie in a series of photographs.


Humm ahve they even watched oldboy!? i never once seen him run round with a glock and kill random people..... Maybe if he sued a hammer then were talking.

Actually, on that note whatever position Slim plays for NOFC, make sure he can take alot of shots, nearly broke my hand with one in warmup,  I took some shots of Steve Bowey (ex Bristol City, I think he took their set pieces) and Slims had far more venom in them.  Don't think I've experienced such a powerful strike before.

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #1 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:45:30 PM »
Saw him in Primark with Neil Warnock earlier today

Happy Face

  • TAFKANP
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #2 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:45:36 PM »
From sky news

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1261402,00.html

Police believe the Virginia gunman may have been copying scenes from a film when he carried out his killing spree.

Detectives say Cho Seung-Hui repeatedly watched the South Korean movie Oldboy in the days leading up to the massacre in which 32 people were killed.

The film's themes of obsession and revenge also occur in Cho's own writings. 

In a chilling video sent by the student to the American TV network NBC he appears to re-enact scenes from the movie in a series of photographs.


Humm ahve they even watched oldboy!? i never once seen him run round with a glock and kill random people..... Maybe if he sued a hammer then were talking.

 :o

I wonder if he shagged his daughter too.

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #3 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:45:48 PM »
How hard is it for these cnuts to understand that some people are just crackpots?
I'm bored of Hampden anyway

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #4 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:51:32 PM »


"Odd-job man available.  No job too big."
Quote
failure is like a disease to Kevin Keegan, one without a cure.

HTT on Kevin Keegan.  The glory days are back on N-O.  This is the sort of quality I look for in a forum.

Badly cluttered forums are a disease, HTT's the cure is what I say tbh.

GM

  • TPFKA GeordieMessiah
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #5 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:53:00 PM »
How hard is it for these cnuts to understand that some people are just crackpots?

Indeed. Spot on. :thup:

alex

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #6 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 01:59:14 PM »
Lets blame the films he watched rather than the way he was (possibly) let down by the way the system deals with mental health problems and (more pertinently) the ease with which someone can obtain guns. I'm weeping with Jesus tbh.

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #7 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:03:05 PM »
He was taking up-skirt pictures of lasses as well apparently.  Dorty little fucka.
Quote
failure is like a disease to Kevin Keegan, one without a cure.

HTT on Kevin Keegan.  The glory days are back on N-O.  This is the sort of quality I look for in a forum.

Badly cluttered forums are a disease, HTT's the cure is what I say tbh.

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #8 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:15:23 PM »
I was watching fox news to get the idiotic American take, and here was the debate yesterday:

Are the gun laws too lenient?

Vs

Or should guns be allowed on campus for students to defend themselves?


I simply couldn't believe it, and guess which option they most agreed with?

Dumb fuking yanks.  :rolleyes:

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:22:15 PM »
They had this moustachioed f***er in a bowtie on yesterday from the pro-gun lobby.  Reckons he's had cause to defend himself with a gun before, and if you saw the state of him, you could well believe it.  Anyway, the bloke questioning him goes "So we've had fewer than 100 deaths last year in the UK from gun crime.  In the US, you had 29,000.  That's not good is it?"

The bowtied freak replied by saying "Well that's accounted for by the differing sizes of population, proportionally it's about the same."

And the t*** of a presenter let him get away with it!  Are there 290x as many people living in the US than here?  That's what happens when you hire ex-tennis professionals to tackle serious issues (Andrew f***ing Castle).  It's also what happens when you watch GMTV. :lol:
Quote
failure is like a disease to Kevin Keegan, one without a cure.

HTT on Kevin Keegan.  The glory days are back on N-O.  This is the sort of quality I look for in a forum.

Badly cluttered forums are a disease, HTT's the cure is what I say tbh.

alex

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #10 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:28:14 PM »
:lol: Aye, 17.5 billion people living in the US these days. Give or take a few. I saw a bit of GMTV this morning. TBH, the Beeb aren't much better with their reports live from the campus. As though it adds anything to the story. Kitman was spot on in another thread imo.

BlueStar

  • 2006/07 Newcastle-Online Cup Winner
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:48:52 PM »
I was watching fox news to get the idiotic American take, and here was the debate yesterday:

Are the gun laws too lenient?

Vs

Or should guns be allowed on campus for students to defend themselves?

The republican response is to push through new legislation like this.
http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/state/article/0,1406,KNS_348_5491437,00.html
Quote
NASHVILLE — In a surprise move, a House panel voted today to repeal a state law that forbids the carrying of handguns on property and buildings owned by state, county and city governments — including parks and playgrounds.

"I think the recent Virginia disaster — or catastrophe or nightmare or whatever you want to call it — has woken up a lot of people to the need for having guns available to law-abiding citizens," said Rep. Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains. "I hope that is what this vote reflects."

(╮°-°)╮┳━┳ ( ╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #12 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:53:57 PM »
I was watching fox news to get the idiotic American take, and here was the debate yesterday:

Are the gun laws too lenient?

Vs

Or should guns be allowed on campus for students to defend themselves?

The republican response is to push through new legislation like this.
http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/state/article/0,1406,KNS_348_5491437,00.html
Quote
NASHVILLE — In a surprise move, a House panel voted today to repeal a state law that forbids the carrying of handguns on property and buildings owned by state, county and city governments — including parks and playgrounds.

"I think the recent Virginia disaster — or catastrophe or nightmare or whatever you want to call it — has woken up a lot of people to the need for having guns available to law-abiding citizens," said Rep. Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains. "I hope that is what this vote reflects."



My god in heaven.  :idiot2:

Knightrider

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #13 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 02:54:39 PM »
Lets blame the films he watched rather than the way he was (possibly) let down by the way the system deals with mental health problems and (more pertinently) the ease with which someone can obtain guns. I'm weeping with Jesus tbh.

Agreed, that and the bloke could have simply been a complete nutter where help or no help would have been irrelevant. If someone is hell bent on causing carnage, and this person has the means (guns etc.) to carry out this carnage, it is going to be damn hard to prevent it. To blame films or anything along those lines is a cop out and whoever is blaming these things simply can't comprehend or don't wish to accept that somone could do such a thing.

alex

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #14 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 03:00:52 PM »
It's unbelievable to think that something like this is actually being seen by some as justification for more people being allowed to carry guns around, especially on somewhere like a university campus. How that is supposed to make people safer I do not know. I think it's dangerous to base any legislation on one incident in any case. And while there have been other similar incidents, most victims of gun crime in America are down to (imo) the large amount of weapons being carried around and incidents like this, tragic though they are, are not the main concern (or at least they shouldn't be).

Happy Face

  • TAFKANP
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #15 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 03:07:39 PM »
I can't wait till the next shooting starts, a law biding citizen whips out their pistol and opens fire, only for someone to see them shooting and taking the 'protector' out.  And it builds and builds until it ends up like like the finale of the Wild Bunch.

juniatmoko

  • Mmmmm...
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #16 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 03:15:00 PM »
blimey... it could incite gangsta on campus

SEMTEX

  • Desktop Curling is awesome
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #17 on: Thursday 19 April 2007, 04:46:47 PM »
It's unbelievable to think that something like this is actually being seen by some as justification for more people being allowed to carry guns around, especially on somewhere like a university campus. How that is supposed to make people safer I do not know. I think it's dangerous to base any legislation on one incident in any case. And while there have been other similar incidents, most victims of gun crime in America are down to (imo) the large amount of weapons being carried around and incidents like this, tragic though they are, are not the main concern (or at least they shouldn't be).

tbh, there'd probably be more shootings, but with less casualties. It'd be gang rule... probably means the mentalists wouldn't get a chance though...

still a s*** idea mind.

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #18 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 02:56:46 AM »
you're going to LOVE THIS!


 ;)
http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm

Oct. 15, 1999

A principal and his gun
by Wayne Laugesen



Vice Principal Joel Myrick held his Colt .45 point blank to the high school boy's head. Last week, he told me what it was like. "I said 'why are you shooting my kids?' He said it was because nobody liked him and everything seemed hopeless," Myrick said. "Then I asked him his name. He said 'you know me, Mr. Myrick. Remember? I gave you a discount on your pizza delivery last week."

The shooter was Luke Woodham. On that day in 1997, Woodham slit his mother's throat then grabbed a .30-30 lever action deer rifle. He packed the pockets of his trench coat with ammo and headed off to Pearl High School, in Pearl, Miss.

The moment Myrick heard shots, he ran to his truck. He unlocked the door, removed his gun from its case, removed a round of bullets from another case, loaded the gun and went looking for the killer. "I've always kept a gun in the truck just in case something like this ever happened," said Myrick, who has since become Principal of Corinth High School, Corinth, Miss.

Woodham knew cops would arrive before too long, so he was all business, no play. No talk of Jesus, just shooting and reloading, shooting and reloading. He shot until he heard sirens, and then ran to his car. His plan, authorities subsequently learned, was to drive to nearby Pearl Junior High School and shoot more kids before police could show up.

But Myrick foiled that plan. He saw the killer fleeing the campus and positioned himself to point a gun at the windshield. Woodham, seeing the gun pointed at his head, crashed the car. Myrick approached the killer and confronted him. "Here was this monster killing kids in my school, and the minute I put a gun to his head he was a kid again," Myrick said.

True humanitarian
I've been intrigued by Myrick ever since that day. Most have never heard his name, because the mainstream press barely reported how the massacre was stopped. I've become more interested in Myrick's story with every subsequent mass murder. If only someone like Myrick had been at Columbine, I've pondered.

A few months ago, Soldier of Fortune Publisher Bob Brown asked me if I had any suggestions as to whom should receive his magazine's Humanitarian Award of 1999. In the wake of Columbine, the answer seemed clear: Joel Myrick. Brown talked it over with his staff, gave it some thought and went with my choice. Brown and I will present Myrick with his award Friday in Las Vegas, at the annual Soldier of Fortune Convention and Expo.

Myrick and his gun, no matter how one looks at it, saved lives. His actions saved the lives of waiting victims at a nearby junior high. He may have kept Woodham from shooting police, who would have arrived at the scene disoriented, without Myrick's home turf frame of reference. Arguably, Myrick and his gun even saved the life of the killer, who likely would have killed himself or been shot by SWAT cops after spilling more blood.

Although Myrick saved lives, beyond question, some treat him as a leper. After the shootings, and the relatively peaceful ending to something that could have made Columbine pale in comparison, Myrick was in exile. He'd held a gun to a student's head, and his colleagues simply couldn't accept that.

"Nobody wanted to dog me, but nobody wanted to side with me, either," Myrick says. "I felt like I was being betrayed by everybody."

And that was Mississippi. This summer he studied at Harvard, where he'd been awarded a prestigious education fellowship. That's when uppity intolerance and mass stupidity took on new meaning for Myrick. "Once people found out my story, I got a lot of dirty looks and strange stares," Myrick said. "A few people confronted me."

Myrick shouldn't feel bad. Only goofy losers gave Myrick funny looks, and such people never learn. Myrick's gun, and his ability and willingness to use it, saved lives plain and simple. Yet somehow, in the minds of the anti-intellectual gun control crowd, he's a bad man who did an immoral deed.

By any sane, rational view, Myrick is a life-saving humanitarian. Even in my view, however, his heroic act will be marred by an asterisk in the annals of history. Despite the presence of this brave man, two students still died. Therefore, the footnote of far off history books will read something like this:

*The late 20th Century was an era of crude polemics, in which some people believed hardware items, such as handguns, caused mass murders.
Therefore, ineffective laws that reflected this view made it illegal for this legendary hero to have his gun on campus. The gun was in a truck, giving the killer valuable time as Myrick ran to retrieve it. In modern society, of course, responsible adults have better access to hardware than killers do.

Arguing with a moron
Myrick is as much of a hero as the law would allow. He was only seconds away from the shootings, yet the law had him far away from his gun. Federal law precludes anyone but a cop from having a weapon in or near a school. The modern spree of school shootings began sometime shortly after this law was enacted. In most places, state and local laws needlessly duplicate the federal law, serving only to accommodate political grandstanding.

In Pearl, federal, state and local laws helped Luke Woodham shoot nine students. The deer rifle had to be reloaded after every shot. To hit nine students, Woodham needed time. The moments it took Myrick to reach his gun are what allowed Woodham to continue shooting and almost escape. Gun laws, and nothing else, gave Woodham that time.

But talking to gun control advocates is like talking to five year-olds. Tell a five-year-old it's time for bed, and he'll say "No." Ask why not, and he'll say "because." Likewise, I've told a few gun control advocates about Myrick-telling them how he would have saved more kids had it not been for gun laws-and they've said "guns kill." Or, "we have too many guns." Or, "Woodham killed his victims with a gun."

At which point I say, "Woodham violated several gun laws by having his gun on campus. The law did nothing to deter him, but plenty to deter the man who set out to stop the killings." To which a gun controller replied: "But guns kill."

Sucked in and trapped by this bizarre logic, I attempted to address it. I said: "But Joel Myrick's gun didn't kill. Rather, it allowed children, including the deranged killer, to live."

"Yeah, but all of these school shootings are done by guns," he told me.

So I pounded my head against a wall. Politics and sociology are complex. But if any socio-political issue should be a simple, exact science, it's gun control. All honest modern studies show that gun control, in this culture, benefits criminals while leaving law-abiding victims defenseless.

In his book More Guns Less Crime, Yale law professor John Lott ran the numbers every which way possible. He set out to write a book about guns being bad, and found that every gun law ever enacted in this country has resulted in more violent crime. I saw him on TV recently, debating a gun control advocate. Lott cited numbers and anecdotes. His opponent, in essence, said "but guns kill."

Politics of nothing
Right here in Boulder, a city of self-proclaimed enlightenment, city council members are hard at it trying to enact more gun control in the light of Columbine. Weird. Today in Boulder, it is absolutely illegal in every way, shape and form for a student to walk onto, or anywhere near a public school with a gun of any kind. Remove all state and local gun laws, and you still have a federal law that clearly forbids firearms of any kind within 100 yards of public schools.

Anyone who shoots up any school, anywhere, is violating gun laws. So what does the Boulder City Council think up to address the very real concern of school massacres? Hey, let's pass some gun laws. Duh. "If we can save one life," it would be worth it, Councilman Dan Corson told the Daily Camera.

If the city council manages to craft a gun law that isn't redundant to the Nth degree, it will serve only to make victims of future massacres more defenseless-guaranteed. Some politicians know this, but they don't care. What matters is how the public perceives the headlines their words garner. Guns kill. Duhhh. "Let's outlaw guns."

Gun control was essential to Hitler and slave owners in the Old South. Proven fact: Gun control oppresses and kills. Proven fact #2: Responsible adults, such as Joel Myrick, save lives. When unencumbered by bizarre gun laws, they can save even more lives.

So let's appeal to the Boulder City Council and the Boulder Valley School Board to explore ways of empowering law abiding adults. Perhaps it's time for the school district, with the full support of city hall, to establish a voluntary defensive weapons training course for teachers and administrators. Politicians who find a way to balance the firepower between forces of good and evil, by arming some teachers and administrators, might not get re-elected. But they might preclude a future disaster like Columbine, where SWAT teams sat helplessly in a parking lot while a teacher in the building prepared to fire at the shooters with a fire extinguisher.

Have a good laugh at this idea, on me. Then ask yourself whether it's more important to be re-elected, or to cut short a future school massacre.

We will never rid society of guns unless we eliminate the natural phenomenon of internal combustion. A gun is a crude instrument and nothing more than a controlled explosion. America is home to about 250 million of them, and they're with us to stay regardless of law.

If you want to save lives, the answer is simple. Stop keeping guns from the hands of would-be heroes-the only people who obey gun laws. Joel Myrick had a gun, legally in his truck. Myrick and his gun saved lives, but they could have saved more. The lesson: Some guns save lives.
altogether elsewhere vast
herds of reindeer move across
miles and miles of golden moss
silently and very fast

Ridzuan

Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #19 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 07:42:43 AM »
The film makers are trying to make a living too so you really cant blame them to make a film more realistic.I guess the problem of people getting bad influence from movies or tv shows will never end does it.

juniatmoko

  • Mmmmm...
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #20 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 07:49:37 AM »
The film makers are trying to make a living too so you really cant blame them to make a film more realistic.I guess the problem of people getting bad influence from movies or tv shows will never end does it.


you are really capitalism jackass :cheesy:

BlueStar

  • 2006/07 Newcastle-Online Cup Winner
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #21 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 10:56:23 AM »
On the plus side, I've read a report that when police took an inventory of his dorm he didn't have a single video game and none of his house mates ever saw him playing games.  Jack Thompson must be seething.
(╮°-°)╮┳━┳ ( ╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻

Dave

  • Administrator
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #22 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 11:01:49 AM »
Games ADVERTS Bluestar. It was the adverts I tells you.

The College Dropout

  • The Look Of Satisfaction
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #23 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 11:05:00 AM »
They love their scapegoats over there. They have a plethora to choose from though, you've got Rock n Roll, Hip-Hop, video games and movies to blame for allowing nut cases easy access to guns.

Dave

  • Administrator
Re: How long was it before they blamed movies
« Reply #24 on: Friday 20 April 2007, 11:05:59 AM »
I blame Elvis' hips.