Massacre in Virginia: 33 students dead

[Tricky]

Well Fiberfar, it wouldn't be heavy metal without it.

We've been experiencing the 'crazed father kills wife and children' quite a few times here in the Netherlands during the last five years or so. As sick as these things are, I sometimes wonder if these things have a fad-ish nature to them. I'm not talking about games or music here, just.. news articles, media coverage. Things that show our a human traits, the actual response other people.. well, 'we' have to these.. acts. Reactions from the family of the people who were killed, politics, the conversations we have about them on forums, everything.

I mean they always kill themselves. But chances are they know what will happen in the next couple of days simply because it's been on tv before, splattered all out over the news. We do too actually, and we're not even thát mentally unstable.. uh, most of the time.

There is an almost tangible sense of continuity this. Something much more real than the vague threat of graphic music or gaming. But I don't think we'll be seeing conservative senators trying to close down Fox News for this kind of sensationalism.

[Lady Dragonfly]

Can you imagine what the parents are going through now? It is really heart-breaking. Wounds like that never heal completely.

More information about the killer gradually become available. Apparently, he was a disturbed young man who was referred to counseling by his English teacher.

The Chicago Tribune reported on its Web site that he left a note in his dorm room that included a rambling list of grievances. Citing unidentified sources, the Tribune said he had recently shown troubling signs, including setting a fire in a dorm room and stalking some women.

Investigators believe Cho at some point had been taking medication for depression, the newspaper reported.

The full story:
Suspect’s writing ‘macabre,’ ‘twisted’ - Massacre at Virginia Tech - MSNBC.com

I don't own firearms. I have other priorities and other interests. And I am for the tighter gun control (though I have to admit the tough "gun control" position cost Al Gore so many votes in 2000, that Kerry was quick to proclaim himself a "hunter" in 2004…). I guess a lot of people need shotguns to kill zombies, after all. And don't forget the gun-makers.

However, I am going to agree with Bloodstalker that a tighter gun control by itself would not solve the problem with school shootings.

[Chanak]

Actually, the gunman was recorded as having purchased one of the weapons (a Glock 9mm) used during the shooting. Apparently, he had the receipt for its purchase on his body. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reviewed the sale of that handgun and apparently it was completely legal. Virginia is one of many states that conducts an instant background check on potential buyers of guns. Apparently this individual had no prior record to speak of, thus he was permitted to walk away with the gun at the time the purchase was made.

[Maharlika]

My heartfelt condolences and sympathies to the victims, their loved ones and friends.

Yes, it is quick for some of us to start looking for someone to blame or justify why horrible things like this happens. After the blame you'd hear seemingly sweeping statements only to realize later that our assumptions are invalid after careful research on why that particular incident happened.

A quick overview would easily make us think that there is a stark parallelism between this incident and that of Columbine. However, I would be more prudent and wait for further info and profile surrounding the gunman. Before you know it, others might even go to the extreme and blame legal immigrants for this.

It's also likely that we are seeing the same symptoms only to realize that the root of the problem is different with that of the other.

[Claudius]

I think the cause of the problem is ignorance leading to agression. In other words our understanding of the world affects everything. Intention, effort, calm, actions, life, words. Also being here and now rather than there and then.

Again we have to pick up the pieces. By keeping sane ourselves perhaps we can help disturbed people. Disturbed mentally. Disturbed heart. Both. I hope for safe passage for those killed and a understanding and relief from anguish during loss for the people who know them. Including us.

"All phenomena exist interdependently. Their being is dependent on their parts and attributes. A flower, a tree, or a human being all exist interdependently, relying on their causes, circumstances, attributes and parts. Our happiness, suffering, growth and degeneration all exist on the basis of an interdependent relationship of causes and circumstances."
- Geshe Rabten

RECOMMENDATION
by Thich Nhat Hanh
Promise me,
promise me this day,
promise me now,
while the sun is overhead
exactly at the zenith,
promise me:
Even as they strike you down
with a mountain of hatred and violence;
even as they step on you and crush you like a worm,
even as they dismember and disembowel you,
remember, brother, remember:
man is not your enemy.

The only thing worthy of you is compassion --
invincible, limitless, unconditional.
Hatred will never let you face the beast in man.

One day, when you face this beast alone,
with your courage intact, your eyes kind, untroubled
(even as no one sees them),
out of your smile will bloom a flower.
And those who love you
will behold you
across ten thousands worlds of birth and dying.

Alone again,
I will go on with bent head,
knowing that love has become eternal.
On the long, rough road,
the sun and the moon
will continue to shine

[Magrus]

Personally, I find it disturbing that so many people are so quick to discount this man as psychotic or insane as the reason why he did this. I have a friend, Canadian mind you, if that matters to the folks that think all Americans are gun-toting monsters? She went through a psychology class based on serial killers, and the one common line connecting each serial killer that they went over in her class was a very simple one. Each and every one of them had one, or more often, multiple occurences in their lives which were highly negative during their childhood/teen years. Often abuse in some form, deaths in the family, or commonplace violence in their lives.

Further, something about the lack of comprehension of how basic instincts work disturbs me thoroughly in how humans react to these kinds of situations. Humans are animals, regardless of the delusional belief that humans are beyond and above the base needs and instincts of all animals. This includes basic instincts which take over in times of extreme need or duress. Humans are omnivores, which leads to the urge to hunt and kill. Look at the studies which prove humans become excited or aroused by violence, and the popularity of sports which have violence in them.

Civilizing the species, and the general disdain for violence in favor of safety doesn't get rid of those instincts that humans have quickly. It takes evolution and many, many thousands of years to do that. If you push someone far enough, they do react in a violent manner. The same as if you beat a dog. Eventually, it will remove the offending limb of the person beating it in a violent outburst. If you kick an elephant, it will hurt you.

For those who are clinging desperately to news releases, bear in mind that the media does not relate the true story on these types of incidents. The true story of what happened to the Columbine shooters was never released, and I know someone who was a student and in the building at the time the incident happened. A good friend of his was shot and killed that day, but he says he felt sorry for the killers. They were subjected to some horrid incidents and that was never covered in the news. No matter the amount of digging done by reporters, you won't hear what really happened.

Also, I would point out the general practice of turning a blind eye to situations in educational institutions which students prey on other students. There are, and have been numerous reports of students doing some truly horrid things to other students who are trying to fit into large student groups. The incident where a young college student was found dead from heat stroke in a car trunk years ago comes to mind. I believe that was frat initiation prank?

The incident where a 15 year old boy who was a friend of my cousins who was raped by the entire baseball team here about 5 years ago comes to mind too. The boy got expelled for carrying a knife to school everyday after that. They found out, because one of the boys that raped him went after him again, and the kid pulled the knife to defend himself. Nothing happened to the baseball team, but the other child, the victim was seen as the unstable one that got booted from school. No one believed him, it was 13 baseball players against one kid with a speech impediment that no one liked. The news never recorded anything more than "Boy expelled for carrying a deadly weapon to school. Metal detectors installed." Not "Young boy raped by 13 baseball players, all 14 expelled for violent acts." Not "13 baseball players jailed and charged with rape, one other charged with threatening with a deadly weapon."

[QUOTE=Bloodstalker]It just strikes me that in a lot of these cases you have the person who did the killing being described the exact same way: A loner, kept to themselves, didn;t talk to much of anybody and so on. In other words very few social skills and no network of friends and support. Most people are simply not wired this way. A lot of the time people who withdraw from things like these people seem to do do so as a protective device I think. The problem is that it builds frustration and anger that can't be released until it explodes.[/QUOTE]

Often, this is due to people not believing the person in question when things go wrong. I spoke up with my parents about some really bizarre and violent things that happened in my life, I was never believed. Eventually when you know that no one is going to believe or help you, you seek to deal with it on your own. If you never have any advice on how to deal with these things properly, you stumble through trial and error. Which, often leads to things ending up worse for the person, and then they do something that is a last ditch effort. They get to the point they really don't want to live the way they are, and they get desperate. If they were pushed in a really bad manner and hurt very badly, they get violent too.

The problem with kids that don't have any outlets to get help is that the parents are the only ones that can really go to the police and do something about it. If they parents don't believe the kids, and the kids go to the police, the police go right back to the parents. If they parents seem respectable, the police leave it alone, and the kids get shouted at for making stuff up. Often times now, people even to the ages of their very early 20s don't have a grasp of what to do with themselves. Mom and dad pay for and arrange everything for the kids, so they still don't know how to handle what is going on around them when a crisis happens.

[Fiberfar]

Hm... I read that he supposedly was playing Counter-strike, which according to the article was produced by Microsoft and was all about shooting eachother with guns. I wonder if they write that kind of misleading things on purpose....

[Lady Dragonfly]

Personally, I find it disturbing that so many people are so quick to discount this man as psychotic or insane as the reason why he did this.

He was referred to a mental institution, examined, and treated. The available information strongly suggests that he was mentally unstable or even criminally insane. That could be a mitigating factor, actually. Especially if the lawyer is worth his/her fee. But the gunman is dead, so the point is moot.

Further, something about the lack of comprehension of how basic instincts work disturbs me thoroughly in how humans react to these kinds of situations. Humans are animals, regardless of the delusional belief that humans are beyond and above the base needs and instincts of all animals. This includes basic instincts which take over in times of extreme need or duress. Humans are omnivores, which leads to the urge to hunt and kill. Look at the studies which prove humans become excited or aroused by violence, and the popularity of sports which have violence in them.

Magrus, with all due respect, you should study physiology and psychology a bit more before referring to both as "delusional beliefs". Unfortunately, there is something out there the authorities choose to call a "premeditated murder". The human behavior and criminal intent are not regulated by high/low level of serotonin or adrenalin in one’s blood only. It is all slightly more complicated.

For those who are clinging desperately to news releases, bear in mind that the media does not relate the true story on these types of incidents. The true story of what happened to the Columbine shooters was never released, and I know someone who was a student and in the building at the time the incident happened. A good friend of his was shot and killed that day, but he says he felt sorry for the killers. They were subjected to some horrid incidents and that was never covered in the news. No matter the amount of digging done by reporters, you won't hear what really happened.

Do you really believe that? What "true story"? Do you suggest it is possible to suppress the evidence of "horrid actions" (apparently "known" to a friend of yours and probably somebody else) from the press for a long time? You are kidding.
Logic: Somebody "wronged" the killers; therefore they were the victims, not the students they killed.
Somebody "wronged" them so much that their actions should be justified? As it happens in the "action movies" when a lonely hero decides to take revenge and incidentally blows up the whole town?

Also, I would point out the general practice of turning a blind eye to situations in educational institutions which students prey on other students. There are, and have been numerous reports of students doing some truly horrid things to other students who are trying to fit into large student groups. The incident where a young college student was found dead from heat stroke in a car trunk years ago comes to mind. I believe that was frat initiation prank?

How do you reconcile a notion of "the general practice of turning a blind eye" with a notion "there have been numerous reports"? And what is your opinion about the "students doing some truly horrid things to other students who are trying to fit..."? I assume your sympathy lies with the abused, though if someone chooses to participate in hazing he is asking for trouble.

Often, this is due to people not believing the person in question when things go wrong. I spoke up with my parents about some really bizarre and violent things that happened in my life, I was never believed. Eventually when you know that no one is going to believe or help you, you seek to deal with it on your own. If you never have any advice on how to deal with these things properly, you stumble through trial and error. Which, often leads to things ending up worse for the person, and then they do something that is a last ditch effort. They get to the point they really don't want to live the way they are, and they get desperate. If they were pushed in a really bad manner and hurt very badly, they get violent too.

That may explain "how it’s all happened", but it doesn’t justify a mass murder.
I am not denying the social aspects of crime, but there should be a personal responsibility for one's actions. It is so popular to blame family and society for everything, including one's own bad choices. A lot of people get angry, but only few commit a murder, let alone a mass murder. Especially premeditated, as seems to be the case at VT.

[Lady Dragonfly]

There is an interesting article about so-called profiling.

10 myths about school shootings - Crime & Punishment - MSNBC.com

10 myths about school shootings

By Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
MSNBC

The profile of the gun-toting student in a trench coat is just one of the myths about the rare but murderous attacks in the nation’s schools.

Here are 10 myths about school shootings, compiled by MSNBC.com from a 2002 study by the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Department of Education. The researchers studied case files and other primary sources for 37 attacks by current or former students, and also interviewed 10 of the perpetrators.

Myth No. 1: 'He didn't fit the profile'

In fact, there is no profile. “There is no accurate or useful ‘profile’ of students who engaged in targeted school violence,” the researchers found.

The stereotypes of teens in Goth makeup or other types of dress are not useful in preventing attacks. Just as in other areas of security -- workplace violence, airplane hijacking, even presidential assassination -- too many innocent students will fit any profile you can come up with, and too many attackers will not.

“The demographic, personality, school history, and social characteristics of the attackers varied substantially,” the report said. Attackers were of all races and family situations, with academic achievement ranging from failing to excellent.

Most, but not all, have been male, though that fact alone doesn't help an adult rule in or out someone as dangerous.

Myth No. 2. “He just snapped.”

Rarely were incidents of school violence sudden, impulsive acts. Attackers do not “just snap,” but progress from forming an idea, to planning an attack, to gathering weapons. This process can happen quickly, but sometimes the planning or gathering weapons are discoverable.

Myth No. 3. “No one knew.”

Before most of the attacks, someone else knew about the idea or the plan. "In most cases, those who knew were other kids: friends, schoolmates, siblings and others. However, this information rarely made its way to an adult." Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused concern or indicated a need for help.

Myth No. 4. “He hadn’t threatened anyone.”

Too much emphasis is placed on threats. Most attackers did not threaten, and most threateners did not attack. A child who talks of bringing a gun to school, or seeking revenge on teachers or classmates, poses a threat, whether or not a threat is made.

Myth No. 5. “He was a loner.”

In many cases, students were considered in the mainstream of the student population and were active in sports, school clubs or other activities.

Only one-quarter of the students hung out with a group of students considered to be part of a “fringe group.”

Myth No. 6. “He was crazy.”

Only one-third of the attackers had ever been seen by a mental health professional, and only one-fifth had been diagnosed with a mental disorder. Substance abuse problems were also not prevalent. “However, most attackers showed some history of suicidal attempts or thoughts, or a history of feeling extreme depression or desperation.” Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures.

Myth No. 7. “If only we’d had a SWAT team or metal detectors.”

Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were over well before a SWAT team could have arrived. Metal detectors have not deterred students who were committed to killing themselves and others.

Myth No. 8. “He’d never touched a gun.”

Most attackers had access to weapons, and had used them prior to the attack. Most of the attackers acquired their guns from home.

Myth No. 9. “We did everything we could to help him.”

"Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted or injured by others prior to the attack," and said they had tried without success to get someone to intervene. Administrators and teachers were targeted in more than half the incidents.

[TEMPLAR67]

most of those are very true except for 2 of them he was a loner and he was definitely crazy

[Magrus]

He was referred to a mental institution, examined, and treated. The available information strongly suggests that he was mentally unstable or even criminally insane. That could be a mitigating factor, actually. Especially if the lawyer is worth his/her fee. But the gunman is dead, so the point is moot.

That must be something recent, as the things I read a few days ago didn't include anything with that information, yet people were still chalking this up to insanity without any proof. As far as being medicated and treated? That's laughable, and could very well BE why he decided to shoot everyone. The drugs prescribed in this country are done so willy nilly, and often in a dangerous manner that is harmful to the patient forced to take them. Forced, as in well...forced, and having no choice not to take them, even if they are harmful.

Magrus, with all due respect, you should study physiology and psychology a bit more before referring to both as "delusional beliefs". Unfortunately, there is something out there the authorities choose to call a "premeditated murder". The human behavior and criminal intent are not regulated by high/low level of serotonin or adrenalin in one’s blood only. It is all slightly more complicated.

Don't patronize me. Psychology is an unstable set of beliefs that are highly subjective, biased, and largely based on theory. Something that is ever changing due to the lack of tangible evidence in order to pin something down and prove it as "true". Studies by "professionals" can only go so far when dealing with peoples thoughts and feelings. These things are only interpreted by the people doing the studied. It isn't math, not all equations simply add up if done properly. There are unknowns involved, and the unknowns are filled with guesses, and it is a study based on trial and error.

As far as the belief of "premeditated murder", it is a purely human concept. Yes, you can argue the logic of it, and the existence of it. On both parts, you would be "right". However, as it stands, history proves many, if not all species WILL act in a violent manner if provoked. Humans aren't any different. That was my point, not the legality of the situation. The article that I read, yesterday I believe? Had nothing on the story of the gunman aside from the shooting itself. Not the why, or even the identity of the gunman.

The gunman could have simply gotten up one morning and said "I want to see what happens when I shoot someone. I'm going to buy a gun" and done so as an experiment. He could have been hurt and wanted to get even. He could have thought all of those people were flesh-eating space aliens and wanted to save the planet by killing them. No one was in his head, and no one can really, truly say what went through his head. People can deduce, and dig for answers, and guess, but they cannot know.

Do you suggest it is possible to suppress the evidence of "horrid actions" (apparently "known" to a friend of yours and probably somebody else) from the press for a long time? You are kidding.

Your serious? Ok. There are far more prominent instances in which situations were covered up and lies were produced in order to do so throughout history. It has been happening repeatedly throughout history. Many, many times in this country, and the USSR was famous for it. This isn't anywhere near on that scale, but is done. Yes, I am serious.

The general habit of people disbelieving something because it is unlikely makes things like this easy to accomplish. It is easier to accept that some kids were crazy, shot up a school, and killed themselves than to accept that for years teachers and parents and other students turned a blind eye on what was really going on. It is called denial. You reject truth in favor of a more pleasant denial. If those people had accepted what really went on, and done something about it, the incident that day would never have happened. Since they did nothing, the people that did know are in denial. If you wish to go back to your psychology argument, there are documented instances where people suffer/do really bad stuff and they conveniently forget all about it, and will not admit to it ever having happened.

How do you reconcile a notion of "the general practice of turning a blind eye" with a notion "there have been numerous reports"? And what is your opinion about the "students doing some truly horrid things to other students who are trying to fit..."? I assume your sympathy lies with the abused, though if someone chooses to participate in hazing he is asking for trouble.

My opinion doesn't really matter on that. I was simply interjecting a possible alternative way of looking at this situation and information as well. Apparently more information has been reported since I read the article about the shootings. To be honest, I have no interest in reading it. In my personal experience, where I know people who can prove things have happened to them, the media isn't often truthful.

That may explain "how it’s all happened", but it doesn’t justify a mass murder.
I am not denying the social aspects of crime, but there should be a personal responsibility for one's actions. It is so popular to blame family and society for everything, including one's own bad choices. A lot of people get angry, but only few commit a murder, let alone a mass murder. Especially premeditated, as seems to be the case at VT.

I never said the gunman was innocent, or deserved a pardon, did I? That he wasn't at fault, or didn't know what he was doing when he did it? I find it to be immature to think that you could place the blame of your actions on someone else. However, there are almost always secondary things which tie into a decision made of this magnitude. I had really bad stuff happen to me in high school, I didn't kill everyone. I could have, it wouldn't have been too hard. I didn't though. This person chose to. That was his call, regardless of what pushed him to the decision.

Yet, I do believe certain things people run into in their lives would make an action such as this more understandable than say someone who just decided randomly one day he wanted to plan a mass killing/suicide. Much like someone else would plan a random party. Simply for something to do. Much like people are more apt to be understanding of a woman who was raped killing the rapist as opposed to a woman simply killing a random man on the street.

[k2jaggededge]

Theirs something here that I musk ask.
This may sound extreme and let me start off by saying it is truly a tragic situation but...

The killer used Two 9mm glocks with a 10 round clip in each gun. Their were 33 people killed plus others injured. That means he would have to reload each gun atleast 3 times. Now before I go on I by no means degreading or implying anything, but was their no one to attack the dude when he was reloding. The building was filled with 200+ people, and he had only 20 rounds to fire off at a time. You can't really think about how you would react in that kind of situation without training. But I just don't know what to think about this.

United 93, the flight that fought back save thousand of lives because they over came odds and fought back.

I don't no what to think accecpt where was the will to fight back?

[Claudius]

I wouldn't know what to do. I guess if you noticed that he was reloading you could take a risk. But he might have gun number two waiting?

[Eadaii]

I agree that, had I been in that situation, I would have attacked him while he was reloading if I got the opportunity ... Well, I hope I would, but you never know for sure until you're in such a situation. However, I've been trained. So I can understand how people who haven't been would freeze. I probably would have before I'd been trained. Because if you have no experience with guns, disarming, or attacks, it's not going to seem so easy. And I know that in horrific situations, it's not hard to become a deer in the headlights.

My first desire, though, would be to run, if at all possible. Self preservation and all. So I can really relate to the students who climbed out of windows. If no escape like that was possible, however, I'd definitely attack him - reloading or no. If you're going to die anyway, you might as well give it a shot. On the other hand, "playing dead", if the opportunity arises, might be a smarter solution.

I can't even begin to imagine what these people have gone through. Having seen someone be shot was horrible enough ... and I didn't feel directly threatened, and the person didn't even die. To experience that must be a nightmare. There's nothing to really say about it. I am deeply sorry for the victims and wish their families the best in coping with this.

On an absurd note, am I completely alone in kind of enjoying the fact that guns are accessible in America? I know it's a morbid though, but easier access to guns increases the numbers of guns that are used in violent crimes, and I'd MUCH rather be shot than stabbed.

[QuenGalad]

I'm not saying that guns should be accessible to anyone. But, to quote Terry Pratchett, "criminals don't obey the laws. It's more or less requirement for the job". This was in fact written by T.P. on the subject of forbidding the citizens to carry arms. Criminals don't obey the laws, so they will have arms anyway, but you won't, because you obey.

I have spent a year's time on training to use brass knuckles correctly. It was a highly satisfactory weapon, and I got quite good in using it. Lucky me. One day I was attacked in a lift by a perfectly ordinary-looking man. Unlucky him, because I gave him quite a lot to think about. But, when the police came, they were less interested in the would-be criminal than in learning how come I was able do defend myself! They obviously expected a whimpering, crying, hurt sweetheart, and the fact I was not was highly suspicious. A nice policewoman advised me to hide the knuckles, because they were illegal, and if found, I would be prosecuted... The man that attacked me was almost forgotten in the ardent inquest of me. The would-be victim.

The law is not on our side. It will never be. So I prefer to have a gun, instead of having hope.

[fable]

The killer used Two 9mm glocks with a 10 round clip in each gun. Their were 33 people killed plus others injured. That means he would have to reload each gun atleast 3 times. Now before I go on I by no means degreading or implying anything, but was their no one to attack the dude when he was reloding...

When you suddenly without prior notice find yourself faced with a mad gunman shooting off rounds of ammunition within a few feet of you, surrounded by screaming people, and you rush to tackle him, then you can criticize. Until then, your remarrks appear to imply that you know exactly how you would behave in such a situation, and with respect, that just simply isn't the case.

United 93, the flight that fought back save thousand of lives because they over came odds and fought back.

The latter makes a very poor analogy for the former. United 93 offered the concentrated calm of knowing an act of violence was going to take place; until then, everybody was safe on board, and there was plenty of time to think about it. There was no time to think at Virginia Tech, as surely you must realize. Bullets were instantly flying, and people were dying everywhere. Reactions were immediate, visceral, and emotional. You ever been in a warzone during an active bombing raid that was well-targeted? Plenty of screaming, blood jetting around you and on you, people dying everywhere?

I don't no what to think accecpt where was the will to fight back?

I don't really think you've thought this through. It is far too easy to toss out remarks on the Web, only to realize later--a day, a month, a year--how incredibly shallow and insensitive they must seem, not only to others, but to ourselves as well when they are considered in a proper state of mind.

[TEMPLAR67]

I would agree with fable, it is very easy to say what ud do in that situation while ur safe at home sitting in front of a computer.

The killer used Two 9mm glocks with a 10 round clip in each gun. Their were 33 people killed plus others injured. That means he would have to reload each gun atleast 3 times. Now before I go on I by no means degreading or implying anything, but was their no one to attack the dude when he was reloding. The building was filled with 200+ people, and he had only 20 rounds to fire off at a time. You can't really think about how you would react in that kind of situation without training. But I just don't know what to think about this.

I also dont think that anyone would have been able to get close enough to him to take him down, his 9mm holds 15 rounds and the 22 he had probably around 25 rounds, so he would be able to shoot at someone if he had to while he was reloading

[Xandax]

<snip>
The killer used Two 9mm glocks with a 10 round clip in each gun. Their were 33 people killed plus others injured. That means he would have to reload each gun atleast 3 times. Now before I go on I by no means degreading or implying anything, but was their no one to attack the dude when he was reloding. The building was filled with 200+ people, and he had only 20 rounds to fire off at a time. You can't really think about how you would react in that kind of situation without training. But I just don't know what to think about this.

United 93, the flight that fought back save thousand of lives because they over came odds and fought back.

I don't no what to think accecpt where was the will to fight back?

To get close enough to disarm somebody wielding a gun while he reloads, you have to be pretty close to begin with. That makes positioning quite an important element.
That would mean you'd likely taken at least one bullet to begin with trying to get to him to be close enough when he reloads. Lest you were hiding behind him or something.
It would be very difficult to disarm him without getting killed, so if done it would have to be multiple people trying, and wanting to risk their own life.

And any comparison to United 93 is misleading as both the scenario and setting is different.
If anything - I would guesstimate that it would be easier to react as United 93 people did, without knowing the true story of that flight as not represented by Hollywood type medias - then it would be to overpower a shooter as is this case.

There is to much Hollywood and to little realism in the quoted statement I think.

[Vicsun]

The killer used Two 9mm glocks with a 10 round clip in each gun. Their were 33 people killed plus others injured. That means he would have to reload each gun atleast 3 times. Now before I go on I by no means degreading or implying anything, but was their no one to attack the dude when he was reloding. The building was filled with 200+ people, and he had only 20 rounds to fire off at a time. You can't really think about how you would react in that kind of situation without training. But I just don't know what to think about this.

Maybe he reloaded when there weren't any people around. When someone starts firing a gun people tend to want to not be around.

Or maybe, since he had two guns, he reloaded them one at a time, always keeping a loaded gun he could empty in anyone who got close.

Or maybe people were terrified out of their minds since there was a psychopath intent on killing everyone on the loose, and didn't think clearly.

[Gilliatt]

I can also add that when you hear shots and see people fall down, you don't count how many bullets are left in the chamber. And unless you are a gun expert, you have no idea how many bullets each weapons has.