The Virginia Tech Review Panel spent most of its Monday meeting at George Mason University discussing mental health issues.
When the panel opened the meeting for public comment, however, members heard loudly from both sides of the gun-control debate.
Legal processes were followed when Virginia Tech student Seung-Hui Cho purchased the two guns he later used to kill 32 people on April 16.
He was able to obtain the guns even though he was technically banned from owning weapons because he had a history of mental illness because a since-closed loophole in Virginia law prevented that information from being relayed to law enforcement authorities.
Friends and family of Cho’s victims spoke emotionally for tighter regulations, including prohibitions on semiautomatic weapons and the type of ammunition Cho used.
“The Second Amendment’s right to bear arms is not absolute, just as the First Amendment’s right to freedom of speech is subject to reasonable restrictions,” said Lou Ann McNabb, a family friend of 18-year-old Reema Samaha, who was shot and killed in a Virginia Tech classroom. “Having more guns readily available does not make society safer.”
Gun-rights supporters countered that had students been allowed to carry firearms on Virginia Tech’s campus, Cho may have been stopped before completing his killing spree. Virginia law allows licensed gun owners to carry weapons in almost all public areas, but allows colleges and universities to prohibit students and faculty from carrying weapons on campus. Most Virginia universities, including Virginia Tech and George Mason, ban firearms.
“The right to defend yourself shouldn’t stop the moment you step on campus,” said GMU student Andrew Dysart. “College campuses are not always as safe as we believe they should be.”
