Virginia Tech

I've read a lot about the South Korean (I'm not going to give anyone the satisfaction of saying his name – he's not worth it) who gunned down 32 people and then himself.

Firstly, there's the issue of how the university didn't take him out in the two hours between killing sprees. Shame on them.

Secondly, there's the issue of gun control. Here I like to put myself in the situation of someone in the classroom with the psycho gunman. If I'd had a gun, I'd take him out, no problem. I'd shoot him in the knees and the hands, to disable him (I am a very good shot – I just don't like guns per se). If I didn't have a clear shot and my life was in danger, I'd shoot him in the head or the chest (or both) in self-defence.

The problem is, I'm not allowed a gun on campus in Virginia Tech. Wow, that sucks.

It's a moral dilemma – I don't like guns, but I learnt how to use them so that I could defend myself if the need came about. Plus, I lived in pre-democracy South Africa, and guns were taught at school in Cadets.

I don't approve of guns, and I think they should be banned from campus. I also don't think that the people who let the mad gunman buy guns are at fault. If someone is crazed enough to kill 32 people, he's going to get guns from somewhere.

Which brings me to my final point: Zero Tolerance. I don't think Zero Tolerance would have prevented this tragedy. Making laws to govern acts of random violence are not going to stop acts of random violence. They happen, they are sad, and taking away rights is not going to solve the problem.