[StylinRed]

I was watching this story develop on the news and initially I thought it was just 1 person dead, the shooter


then i see reports that at least 100 rounds were fired


and now its said that 20 have been killed and at least 10 are children :/



that's just so fucked up....



flip on any news channel to see


Connecticut school shooting claims 'multiple' victims - World - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/14/connecticut-school-shooting.html)

Children and adults gunned down in Connecticut school massacre – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/14/shooting-reported-at-connecticut-elementary-school/?hpt=hp_t1)

[Gridlock]

Once every what 2-3 weeks now?

As much as I believe in personal freedom, and find our gun laws to be archaic, I think if the US is the example of what happens with that freedom, I'll keep Canada gun free.

I think this is a fine example of what happens when you have a middle class that is eroding. On a fundamental level, people feel they have less and less to "live" for.

My heart goes out to the family of those involved, and the community in which the school stands.

[lady_mapetite]

my coworker and i were browsing today's headlines and then this came up as breaking news. this is terrible, especially right before christmas. principal and school psy are victims and children shot ranged from kindergarten to grade 4 =(

these kids are going to be so traumatized.. now and when they grow up
Posted via RS Mobile

[TPMarko]

in less than 6 months aurora, oregon and now connecticut. wtf is wrong with people?

[hal0g0dv2]

Wow
Rip
Posted via RS Mobile

[Hondaracer]

Let the bodies hit the floor

Shit is only going to go downhill from here, guns or not fucking phsycos are becoming more prevalent in the society we live in today, and when you just stop caring about a single fucking thing why not take some people with you
Posted via RS Mobile

[b0unce. [?]]

holy shit this is fucked

[Durrann]

thats just horrible

[spades]

Holy fuck , rip
Posted via RS Mobile

[heleu]

at least 27 dead...
At least 27 killed in Connecticut school shooting - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/at-least-27-killed-in-connecticut-school-shooting/article6366987/)

[MeowMeow]

Felt so depressed just reading the article :(
Rip children & other victims
Posted via RS Mobile

[Gridlock]

Let the bodies hit the floor

Shit is only going to go downhill from here, guns or not fucking phsycos are becoming more prevalent in the society we live in today, and when you just stop caring about a single fucking thing why not take some people with you
Posted via RS Mobile

My theory, based on zero reading whatsoever...the social net that supports these people has been so squeezed that their supports have eroded. Drugs are ever increasing in supply, and decreasing in cost, the middle class is no longer a powerful block of money and aspiration, need I continue?

When people feel there is no hope, then they literally do not care.

[JaPoola]

I blame the mix of abundant anti depressants, guns, and stupidity.

[dinosaur]

"At least 18 children dead".

What a horrendous headline to read. I feel gutted.

[StylinRed]

a child witness said he saw a guy pinned and handcuffed to the floor, if that was the shooter... did the police kill him :crazy2:





"At least 18 children dead".

What a horrendous headline to read. I feel gutted.

In the bigger picture though, 21,000 children die a day because people don't want to feed them
http://www.unicef.org/media/files/Child_Mortality_Report_2011_Final.pdf

[gdoh]

goose bumps just reading the story

rip

[7seven]

News1130 ‏@News1130radio
RT @CBSNews DEVELOPING: MT @johnmillercbs: Officials have a potential second shooter in custody in elementary school shooting

Sounds like there was more than 1 shooter

[TPMarko]

meanwhile in china...

Man stabs 22 children at China primary school | The Raw Story (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/14/man-stabs-22-children-at-china-primary-school/)

this world is fucked!

[jpark]

wtf is going on
this is so sad...

[MoBettah]

In the bigger picture though, 21,000 children die a day because people don't want to feed them
http://www.unicef.org/media/files/Child_Mortality_Report_2011_Final.pdf


Yes, but these are white American children from Connecticut!

[StylinRed]

Sounds like there was more than 1 shooter

maybe that's who the kid saw



yeah cnn says a 2nd person is in custody being questioned :/

[InvisibleSoul]

If there are actually 27 dead, this would be the 4th worst shooting in the last 50 years.

[dinosaur]

CBC anchor just ask if this was terrorism...spokesman said, "no".

Interesting how 'terrorism' is no longer defined "systematic use of terror, often violent", but rather an Islamic backed attack.

For shame.

[Acura604]

sickening. as a parent, i have no words but can only express frustration and anguish.

[Phozy]

My school just made an anouncement about it right after this thread was made.

Its one thing for natural disasters to kill, but for someone to intentionally go in...

Rest in peace kids
Posted via RS Mobile

[jaguar604]

Death toll closer to 30 than 20 with a majority being kids...

RIP to all the innocent.

[european]

damn :(

[ryugeeh]

Fuck this is depressing. Why can't these people just kill themselves

[Ronith]

Whoever did this is 100% pure evil.

How sickening....just...wtf.

[bensta]

this is apparent shooter according to cnn

https://www.facebook.com/rlanza?fref=ts

[Phil@rise]

how is this not terrorism :(. My kids are getting alot more hugs tonight.

[fliptuner]

I hope they put a bullet through the shooter's head and save the unnecessary drama.

[bensta]

hes already dead flip

[StylinRed]

this is apparent shooter according to cnn

https://www.facebook.com/rlanza?fref=ts

:/ well he's originally from newtown but i hope people wait before they start sending hate mail etc to his account/friends :/ that would suck

[Jason00S2000]

CBC anchor just ask if this was terrorism...spokesman said, "no".

Interesting how 'terrorism' is no longer defined "systematic use of terror, often violent", but rather an Islamic backed attack.

For shame.

I think if it were Tim McVeigh politically-motivated or statement-type attack like the Unabomber, they would still call it terrorism.

[Jason00S2000]

Fuck, I'm depressed

[Jet]

RIP to all the victims ...

I can't even begin to understand why things like this happen ... so messed up

[Mr.HappySilp]

and he had to do it on the last day before Xmas break........

[hotong]

so fucked up

[fliptuner]

hes already dead flip

Sorry, I thought there was another suspect.

My point remains, if the guy is obviously guilty, don't bother arresting him.

[AW607]

Ugh that's horrible. Not a very good start to the morning :okay:

Feelings go out for all the families involved. Rest in paradise kids

[dinosaur]

I think if it were Tim McVeigh politically-motivated or statement-type attack like the Unabomber, they would still call it terrorism.

I guess I should expand more on what else they said...

-There have been no 'alert' warnings from the gov't that have been issued
-No suspicious activities at the borders
-No previous threats against the school or this town

[7seven]

News1130 ‏@News1130radio
CBS News has confirmed the shooter's mother was a teacher at the elem school and is among the dead

Connection of the shooter to the school

[gdoh]

https://twitter.com/Ryan__Lanza same guy?

[dinosaur]

Connection of the shooter to the school

Apparently, most of the murdered students were in his mother's class.

[Fuhrër-Z]

What a sick fucking mind...
Taking the lives of others is something that no one should be able to justify...And killing kids... That takes an extraordinarily twisted mind.

[Ronith]

https://twitter.com/Ryan__Lanza

[TheKingdom2000]

This is so disheartening.
I can't even imagine what the parents are going through.

[jepho]

Wow RIP
18 kids, 8 adults confirmed dead.
Plus a dead family member of the shooter at a home as well.

horrible and so close to Christmas.

I think its pretty ridicules that the reporters are interviewing the little kids.

[tiger_handheld]

any word on motive?

ps: did not look at regular news links- came straight to RS.

[knight604]

I hate waking up to terrible news, cloud over my head now..
Posted via RS Mobile

[Psykopathik]

the right to bear arms. *sigh* this should only apply to people with a clean psychological background check and yearly re-evaluations.

[dinosaur]

https://twitter.com/Ryan__Lanza



edit: nope.

[jerche]

apparently that is not his facebook since he has been updating his statuses...

https://twitter.com/Aurvant/status/279672671137058816/photo/1

[hotjoint]

RIP

[MG1]

Just when you think you've seen it all. Elementary kids for fuck's sake. Sickening. I have to go outside and take a breath of fresh air.......so upset right now.

[twitchyzero]

apparently that is not his facebook since he has been updating his statuses...

https://twitter.com/Aurvant/status/279672671137058816/photo/1

that's what happens when internet detectives spam facebook link before anything is confirmed (no CNN doesn't count)...poor guy

[jmvdesign]

not the same guy: Ryan Lanza ‏@Ryan__Lanza
so aperently im getting spammed bc someone with the same name as me killed some ppl... wtf?

[jepho]

yeah, they just confirmed that is the guy.

well there's some dark comments posted... some for shadowing leading to the event possibly.

[kayceeee]

don't mean the hijack thread but didn't want to start a new thread. But in China. Man goes to primary school with a knife and wounds 22 children.

Rip to all the children.
Knife attack at Chinese school wounds 22 children - CNN.com (http://us.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html?hpt=hp_bn2)
Posted via RS Mobile

[TPMarko]

https://twitter.com/Ryan__Lanza

Ryan Lanza ‏@Ryan__Lanza

so aperently im getting spammed bc someone with the same name as me killed some ppl... wtf?

whoops!

EDIT - beat me to it

[Jason00S2000]

My creative brain keeps imagining the scene, the looks on faces, how it went down, the blood, the gunsmoke, etc

It's tough having an imagination so vivid and ruminating on things like this. Ultra-depressing.

I don't understand how someone could lose their humanity to such a degree to shoot strangers.

[gdoh]

^:suspicious:

[StylinRed]

so i guess i was right people couldnt wait for confirmation and started spamming the guy

My creative brain keeps imagining the scene, the looks on faces, how it went down, the blood, the gunsmoke, etc

It's tough having an imagination so vivid and ruminating on things like this. Ultra-depressing.


oh jason you never can just switch off for too long eh

[TPMarko]

JD Burrell

To all the parents of the children killed today, file charges against your school administrators and against the legislators holding them directly responsible for the death of your child. Had there been 1 law abiding teacher carrying a gun today how many of our children would still be alive?
December 14, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse | Reply


quoted from CNN. i hope this guy isn't serious. :suspicious:

[SB7]

Demons still exist in this world, but they've taken root in our minds. Mental health issues are often neglected and and forced to cope by "manning up." RIP to the victims and families and all those affected by this tragedy.
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

quoted from CNN. i hope this guy isn't serious. :suspicious:

knowing americans they're stupidly serious




News just reported that the classes/teachers were alerted to the situation because the PA system was turned on when the killer was in the office and they could hear a fight going on (and i suppose subsequently the killing of the principal etc) so that they were able to go on lockdown

[spideyv2]

what kind of sick fuck shoots up an elementary school? this is fucking disgusting

[StylinRed]

supposedly the secondary crime scene is in new jersey and it's the killers Father (but also reports it may be his gf, brother, may not be in NJ etc etc)


he doesn't seem to have a common name yet that facebook guy is from the same town and currently lives in new jersey too

unless that guy with the facebook account was just trolling people




Confirmed 28 dead, 20 children, 6 staff, 1 adult at secondary crime scene and the shooter

[Recon604]

fcuk this is so upsetting, I feel so bad for their parents. My heart goes out to the children killed right before Christmas

[Akinari]

Hearing about the news and seeing on this news just brought tears to my eyes. No words can express how disgusted and shocked by this incident, it's really disheartening, especially to the friends and families of the victims and to all those involved, damn the Christmas presents must still be under the trees, fucking hell how are these families supposed to cope with this tragedy?

Hell, even Obama teared up and could barely continue with his speech.

RIP everyone

[The_Situation]

quoted from CNN. i hope this guy isn't serious. :suspicious:

Yep sounds about right. Americans defending their gun laws by saying if they had open carry, they could have shot the shooter :rukidding:

[Traum]

Connection of the shooter to the school

CBS News has confirmed the shooter's mother was a teacher at the elem school and is among the dead
WTF, man... Kill your own mother, and kill all those innocent kids...

[StylinRed]

Ryan Lanza isn't the killer his brother Adam Lanza is

and supposedly Ryan Lanza has a history with police

[marc0lishuz]

the right to bear arms. *sigh* this should only apply to people with a clean psychological background check and yearly re-evaluations.
Agreed.

The right to bear arms would have been necessary in the 1800's, but not in 2012. My 0.02.

[pastarocket]

This scumbag kills himself to avoid the punishment from the justice system. What a coward! -to kill school children, the school principal, and his own parents and to get away with it.

-most heartbreaking news that I've heard all year. :cry:

[shenmecar]

this is depressing. Poor kids. Rip. =(
Posted via RS Mobile

[dark0821]

rip... came home to read about this.... sigh

[Gumby]

Disgusting... feels extra bad when you're a parent.

[jepho]

This scumbag kills himself to avoid the punishment from the justice system. What a coward! -to kill school children, the school principal, and his own parents and to get away with it.

-most heartbreaking news that I've heard all year. :cry:

true but i'd rather a person like this be dead right away then go through the legal system and eat up my tax dollars then have him sit in jail and have my tax dollars going to support his daily life. And if it we here he would be released in 10 years anyways.

Hes dead, one less fucking idiot around.

[gilly]

Quote:
She said: 'I was one of the first there and they were bringing children out, carrying them out. One girl came out and her face was covered in blood and she had bits of meat from other people in her hair. It was terrible.

Sandy Hook elementary shooting: 29 dead including 22 children at Connecticut school | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248197/Sandy-Hook-elementary-shooting-29-dead-including-22-children-Connecticut-school.html#ixzz2F4CLlrYm)

[hotshot1]

I bet there's gonna be outrage about gun control again, which I think is skirting the real issue: Mental health. How did it get to the point where he wanted to and followed through with his plans to kill people? It couldn't have been a spontaneous act. Maybe it was, I don't know all the facts, but I doubt he woke up today and decided he was going to do what he did. He was obviously mentally ill. Did he not have the support from school/family/etc.? Was he neglected?

If there were no guns, he would have found another way to kill - case in point the China story. They have very few guns there but the weapon of choice turned to machetes. Maybe guns need to be regulated more tightly but in the States the general feeling is that it's in the Constitution and that if the government takes away the right to protect yourself and your property, the government is infringing on your freedom.

[snails]

i vote for death penalty! no wasting time or money on the sick fucks in the world... they want to kill or hard others they deserve to be harmed and killed themselves.

[TheKingdom2000]

if they had open carry laws, would any teacher actually do this?
Maybe they should allow the principal to carry a gun in a safe in his office, provided he is trained?
I don't know, but I just don't want this to happen again. Worst news ever.
Posted via RS Mobile

[hotong]

President Obama Makes a Statement on the Shooting in Newtown, Connecticut - YouTube

[Lomac]

Disgusting... feels extra bad when you're a parent.

x2

I'm not a parent myself, but I'm pretty damn protective of my best friend's two daughters. I called her up after hearing about this and had her hug the girls for me. I can't imagine what the parents of the victims are going through right now. It's just absolutely terrible.

While part of me is glad that the suspect is dead, the other part was hoping he'd be stuck in a prison's general population. Call prisoners what you will, but when it comes to harming children, even the hardest criminals will band together to teach that person a lesson. To me, I'd be more than happy paying my taxes knowing that he'd be suffering every single day of the rest of his life.

[Harvey Specter]

Very sad and right before xmas, I can't imagine what the parents are going through. :(

And on the topic of gun control...people need to be less focused on making the gun laws stricter and need to focus on mental illness and programs that need to be provided to people. We continue to cut budgets for mental illness, shutdown institutions that provide help so the result is you have all these people roaming our streets without any help. I'm a strong believer that strict gun laws will accomplish nothing, anyone who has a death wish will obtain guns no matter how tough it is, if they can't get guns they'll use other weapons like knives.

[Akinari]

Lanza is believed to have been carrying four weapons including two handguns and a rifle and was wearing a bullet-proof vest and black military gear.
Three guns were found at the scene - a Glock and a Sig Sauer, both pistols - and a .223-caliber rifle.


America, Y U DO THIS TO YOURSELF?! :fulloffuck:

Alberta Bajraliu 41, got a call from a friend who heard a gunshot at the school and told her to check it out.
Mrs Alberta's nine-year-old daughter Venesa was at the school but her two other children are not.
She said: 'I was one of the first there and they were bringing children out, carrying them out. One girl came out and her face was covered in blood and she had bits of meat from other people in her hair. It was terrible.


Like, I can't even. Seriously, there needs to be some kind of justice.

[dachinesedude]

I bet there's gonna be outrage about gun control again, which I think is skirting the real issue: How did it get to the point where he wanted to and followed through with his plans to kill people? It couldn't have been a spontaneous act. Maybe it was, I don't know all the facts, but I doubt he woke up today and decided he was going to do what he did. He was obviously mentally ill. Did he not have the support from school/family/etc.? Was he neglected?

If there were no guns, he would have found another way to kill - case in point the China story. They have very few guns there but the weapon of choice turned to machetes. Maybe guns need to be regulated more tightly but in the States the general feeling is that it's in the Constitution and that if the government takes away the right to protect yourself and your property, the government is infringing on your freedom.

this story = 29 dead
china story = 22 injured

HUGE difference

what's more realistic, getting rid of the mental people or getting rid of their guns?

gun control, like ASAP, there's a reason we dont have public massacres here in canada

RIP

[StylinRed]

i vote for death penalty! no wasting time or money on the sick fucks in the world... they want to kill or hard others they deserve to be harmed and killed themselves.

a death penalty actually costs more than to imprison them for lie

[Harvey Specter]

this story = 29 dead
china story = 22 injured

HUGE difference

what's more realistic, getting rid of the mental people or getting rid of their guns?

gun control, like ASAP, there's a reason we dont have public massacres here in canada

RIP

Well the problem is America is beyond gun control, there's basically 1 gun for every American so there's no way gun control will work or make a dent into these mass shootings. We need to turn our attention to mental illness which imo needs to be addressed here in Canada and in America.

[wasabisashimi]

Do we have a motive yet? besides the crazy bastard open fire killing his own mom.

[G]

^ He killed his dad before going to the school so it wasn't really targeted at his mom. No motive yet, but apparently he also posted he was gonna do it on 4chan a couple days before or something? I also read he was an honor roll law student or something. Media tends to fuck up information and that's what stopped me from reading more news. Never the less, sad news today. RIP.
Posted via RS Mobile

[trd2343]

this story = 29 dead
china story = 22 injured

HUGE difference

what's more realistic, getting rid of the mental people or getting rid of their guns?

gun control, like ASAP, there's a reason we dont have public massacres here in canada

RIP

Ditto.

Gun control does not prevent incidents like these from happening, but certainly help decide the outcome of these incidents. Injured > Death

[LiquidTurbo]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
Posted via RS Mobile

[punkwax]

Just finished hugging my girls for a solid 60 seconds each as soon as I got home... so sad.

RIP :(

[Sushi604]

i vote for death penalty! no wasting time or money on the sick fucks in the world... they want to kill or hard others they deserve to be harmed and killed themselves.

No.

[Yodamaster]

this story = 29 dead
china story = 22 injured

HUGE difference

what's more realistic, getting rid of the mental people or getting rid of their guns?

gun control, like ASAP, there's a reason we dont have public massacres here in canada

RIP


There are tons of law abiding citizens who have guns in Canada, your point is invalid. The real issue is what caused this guy to snap, and what could have been done to help him before he chose to do this.

We have a superior social service structure for the mentally ill / troubled.

[tiger_handheld]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
Posted via RS Mobile


lets assume you don't have a gun...
i'm going to come to your house and punch you in the face for parking like a dumbass. you get angry and I run out. you chase me down and beat the crap out of me. I learn a valuable lesson and need plastic surgury but i'll live. lets say..

Now lets assume you have a gun kept in your garage...
Same story.. only difference is, you will probably go to the garage, pick up the gun and come after me while shooting. one or two of your shots will probably hit me , and kill me.

so the way i see it, guns enable people to kill other people.

[falcon]

This scumbag kills himself to avoid the punishment from the justice system. What a coward! -to kill school children, the school principal, and his own parents and to get away with it.

-most heartbreaking news that I've heard all year. :cry:

I'd hardly call being dead "getting away with it"... but whatever.

[wasabisashimi]

lets assume you don't have a gun...
i'm going to come to your house and punch you in the face for parking like a dumbass. you get angry and I run out. you chase me down and beat the crap out of me. I learn a valuable lesson and need plastic surgury but i'll live. lets say..

Now lets assume you have a gun kept in your garage...
Same story.. only difference is, you will probably go to the garage, pick up the gun and come after me while shooting. one or two of your shots will probably hit me , and kill me.

so the way i see it, guns enable people to kill other people.

Corretion : Mental people kills innocent poeple. If I have a gun, I won't kill you because you are a bad driver. Unless my parents were alcoholic and they used to beat me up for no reason.

[vyrospec]

RIP to victims and condolences to their families. :(

[124Y]

RIP. This is horrible :(

[Harvey Specter]

Corretion : Mental people kills innocent poeple. If I have a gun, I won't kill you because you are a bad driver. Unless my parents were alcoholic and they used to beat me up for no reason.

Exactly. There's so many people who own guns legally who would never pull their guns out because someone pissed them off.

The media keeps yapping about strict gun control but no one wants to go into details about how they would restrict guns and if restricting guns would prevent mass shootings because in reality you can't prevent these type of shootings. The Norway mass shooter purchased guns legally in a country that has strict gun controls, hell you can flat out ban guns but someone who has a plan to kill will find ways to obtain weapons.

Don't get me wrong, I hate guns and wish they weren't around but at the same time I do respect the rights of gun owners and I personally feel strict gun controls will not prevent mass shootings or other premeditated killings.

[HonestTea]

RIP to the innocent people :(
Posted via RS Mobile

[will068]

What you need is not strict gun laws, but strict bullet laws.

If you are convicted of a crime where bullets fire off your gun, add 20 years for each bullet shot (additional to the years you have to be in jail for the actual crime).

However, even the "bullet control" example I stated will not stop a mentally sick person from going haywire to kids like today in Connecticut, or a couple years ago in Norway.

[Hondaracer]

Took this from wikipedia so take it with a grain of salt:

In 2007, it was ESTIMATED that there are ABOUT 875 million firearms in the world, of which ABOUT 270 million are in the US. There are about 1,135 companies world wide that make about 8 million firearms a year.

so almost 1 gun in 6 people worldwide

there is no way to stop gun crime, specifically in the states where handguns and firearms are so prevalent, if somone was desperate enough they could break into homes until they found a gun

I'm completely pro-gun and pro-ownership, as i am a completely responsible user and treat guns with probably the greatest seriousness and care as i do with anything in my life, As has been said, a gun while beit the tool of many of these psychos is simply one weapon of choice, if guns were banned [which would essentially be impossible] people would find other avenues

Also there is absolutely no deterant for this type of heinous crime, what are you going to say? If you kill more than one person you get the death penalty? These people dont give a FUCK about life, let alone other peoples, there is no deterant for them, the guy basically killed his whole family, not a single fuck was given today.

I feel that assault weapons and handguns really have no place for average civilians. However i also feel that that attitude becomes a slipperly slope as giving up a right to one thing evidently leads to giving up the rights to others

[Hondaracer]

What you need is not strict gun laws, but strict bullet laws.

If you are convicted of a crime where bullets fire off your gun, add 20 years for each bullet shot (additional to the years you have to be in jail for the actual crime).

However, even the "bullet control" example I stated will not stop a mentally sick person from going haywire to kids like today in Connecticut, or a couple years ago in Norway.

As i've posted before, the laws specifically in Canada for being in possession of illegal weapons are ridiculous

Through acquaintances i know of a group of guys, typical wanna-be gangsters who were rolling around and got pulled over, upon vehicle search a cop turned up 2 unregistered/stolen hand guns and ammunition

all 3 in the vehicle were released from custody the same night for future trial

Even if it is a slight deterant, there has to be a HARSH penalty for being in illegal possession for weapons without proper licensing etc, who's to say the guy who gets pulled over with an illegal gun doesnt have sinister motives that could be followed through if he hadnt been caught?

[LiquidTurbo]

lets assume you don't have a gun...
i'm going to come to your house and punch you in the face for parking like a dumbass. you get angry and I run out. you chase me down and beat the crap out of me. I learn a valuable lesson and need plastic surgury but i'll live. lets say..

Now lets assume you have a gun kept in your garage...
Same story.. only difference is, you will probably go to the garage, pick up the gun and come after me while shooting. one or two of your shots will probably hit me , and kill me.

so the way i see it, guns enable people to kill other people.

:fulloffuck: what the fuck?

People whine about gun control during these stories, but really, it's not the answer to situations like these. Would gun control stop this guy from locking himself into a room and murdering these kids with an axe or a bomb? I doubt it. Other things are going on, not just gun control.

If you're pro gun control then you might as well be pro-knife control. People kill each other with knives all the time. This is such a tragic story and tough to here. Kids are supposed to feel safe at school. RIP.

Corretion : Mental people kills innocent poeple. If I have a gun, I won't kill you because you are a bad driver. Unless my parents were alcoholic and they used to beat me up for no reason.



Thank you.

[tiger_handheld]

this story = 29 dead
china story = 22 injured

HUGE difference

what's more realistic, getting rid of the mental people or getting rid of their guns?

gun control, like ASAP, there's a reason we dont have public massacres here in canada

RIP

Corretion : Mental people kills innocent poeple. If I have a gun, I won't kill you because you are a bad driver. Unless my parents were alcoholic and they used to beat me up for no reason.


interesting correction. the difference between the mental guy in china and the mental guy in US is, the US guy had a gun, which killed 20 people. In China, it injured 20 people who will probably live. Imagine if the guy in china had a gun - there would be a different headline.

[european]

Like Obama said earlier today, "Our hearts are broken today"

:(

[will068]

As i've posted before, the laws specifically in Canada for being in possession of illegal weapons are ridiculous

Through acquaintances i know of a group of guys, typical wanna-be gangsters who were rolling around and got pulled over, upon vehicle search a cop turned up 2 unregistered/stolen hand guns and ammunition

all 3 in the vehicle were released from custody the same night for future trial

Even if it is a slight deterant, there has to be a HARSH penalty for being in illegal possession for weapons without proper licensing etc, who's to say the guy who gets pulled over with an illegal gun doesnt have sinister motives that could be followed through if he hadnt been caught?

WTF at being released on the same day. Man, we're decades behind our laws.

[trip]

A Timeline Of Mass Shootings In The US Since Columbine


December 11, 2012. On Tuesday, 22-year-old Jacob Tyler Roberts killed 2 people and himself with a stolen rifle in Clackamas Town Center, Oregon. His motive is unknown.

September 27, 2012. Five were shot to death by 36-year-old Andrew Engeldinger at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, MN. Three others were wounded. Engeldinger went on a rampage after losing his job, ultimately killing himself.

August 5, 2012. Six Sikh temple members were killed when 40-year-old US Army veteran Wade Michael Page opened fire in a gurdara in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Four others were injured, and Page killed himself.

July 20, 2012. During the midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, CO, 24-year-old James Holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58. Holmes was arrested outside the theater.

May 29, 2012. Ian Stawicki opened fire on Cafe Racer Espresso in Seattle, WA, killing 5 and himself after a citywide manhunt.

April 6, 2012. Jake England, 19, and Alvin Watts, 32, shot 5 black men in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in racially motivated shooting spree. Three died.

April 2, 2012. A former student, 43-year-old One L. Goh killed 7 people at Oikos University, a Korean Christian college in Oakland, CA. The shooting was the sixth-deadliest school massacre in the US and the deadliest attack on a school since the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre.

October 14, 2011. Eight people died in a shooting at Salon Meritage hair salon in Seal Beach, CA. The gunman, 41-year-old Scott Evans Dekraai, killed six women and two men dead, while just one woman survived. It was Orange County’s deadliest mass killing.

September 6, 2011. Eduardo Sencion, 32, entered an IHOP restaurant in Carson City, NV and shot 12 people. Five died, including three National Guard members.

January 8, 2011. Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) was shot in the head when 22-year-old Jared Loughner opened fire on an event she was holding at a Safeway market in Tucson, AZ. Six people died, including Arizona District Court Chief Judge John Roll, one of Giffords’ staffers, and a 9-year-old girl. 19 total were shot. Loughner has been sentenced to seven life terms plus 140 years, without parole.

August 3, 2010. Omar S. Thornton, 34, gunned down Hartford Beer Distributor in Manchester, CT after getting caught stealing beer. Nine were killed, including Thornton, and two were injured.

November 5, 2009. Forty-three people were shot by Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan at the Fort Hood army base in Texas. Hasan reportedly yelled “Allahu Akbar!” before opening fire, killing 13 and wounding 29 others.

April 3, 2009. Jiverly Wong, 41, opened fire at an immigration center in Binghamton, New York before committing suicide. He killed 13 people and wounded 4.

March 29, 2009. Eight people died in a shooting at the Pinelake Health and Rehab nursing home in Carthage, NC. The gunman, 45-year-old Robert Stewart, was targeting his estranged wife who worked at the home and survived. Stewart was sentenced to life in prison.

February 14, 2008. Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University, killing 6 and wounding 21. The gunman shot and killed himself before police arrived. It was the fifth-deadliest university shooting in US history.

February 7, 2008. Six people died and two were injured in a shooting spree at the City Hall in Kirkwood, Missouri. The gunman, Charles Lee Thornton, opened fire during a public meeting after being denied construction contracts he believed he deserved. Thornton was killed by police.

December 5, 2007. A 19-year-old boy, Robert Hawkins, shot up a department store in the Westroads Mall in Omaha, NE. Hawkins killed 9 people and wounded 4 before killing himself. The semi-automatic rifle he used was stolen from his stepfather’s house.

April 16, 2007. Virginia Tech became the site of the deadliest school shooting in US history when a student, Seung-Hui Choi, gunned down 56 people. Thirty-two people died in the massacre.

February 12, 2007. In Salt Lake City’s Trolley Square Mall, 5 people were shot to death and 4 others were wounded by 18-year-old gunman Sulejman Talović. One of the victims was a 16-year-old boy.

October 2, 2006. An Amish schoolhouse in Lancaster, PA was gunned down by 32-year-old Charles Carl Roberts, Roberts separated the boys from the girls, binding and shooting the girls. 5 young girls died, while 6 were injured. Roberts committed suicide afterward.

March 25, 2006. Seven died and 2 were injured by 28-year-old Kyle Aaron Huff in a shooting spree through Capitol Hill in Seattle, WA. The massacre was the worst killing in Seattle since 1983.

March 21, 2005. Teenager Jeffrey Weise killed his grandfather and his grandfather’s girlfriend before opening fire on Red Lake Senior High School, killing 9 people on campus and injuring 5. Weise killed himself.

March 12, 2005. A Living Church of God meeting was gunned down by 44-year-old church member Terry Michael Ratzmann at a Sheraton hotel in Brookfield, WI. Ratzmann was thought to have had religious motivations, and killed himself after executing the pastor, the pastor’s 16-year-old son, and 7 others. Four were wounded.

July 8, 2003. Doug Williams, a Lockheed Martin employee, shot up his plant in Meridian, MI in a racially-motivated rampage. He shot 14 people, most of them African American, and killed 7.

September 15, 1999. Larry Gene Ashbrook opened fire on a Christian rock concert and teen prayer rally at Wedgewood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, TX. He killed 7 people and wounded 7 others, almost all teenagers. Ashbrook committed suicide.

July 29, 1999. Mark Orrin Barton, 44, murdered his wife and two children with a hammer before shooting up two Atlanta day trading firms. Barton, a day trader, was believed to be motivated by huge monetary losses. He killed 12 including his family and injured 13 before killing himself.

April 20, 1999. In the deadliest high school shooting in US history, teenagers Eric Harris and Dylan Kiebold shot up Columbine High School in Littleton, CO. They killed 13 people and wounded 21 others. They killed themselves after the massacre.

[El Bastardo]

Canada has had five similar school shootings since the Columbine Massacre and almost a half dozen before that.

[StylinRed]

japan has one of the lowest murder rates in the world

there's also strict gun control

the usa has one of the highest murder rates of the developed world and there's no gun control

:)



there's about 2 ppl killed by a firearm a year in Japan
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

[Akinari]

japan has one of the lowest murder rates in the world

there's also strict gun control

the usa has one of the highest murder rates of the developed world and there's no gun control

:)
There's no need for people to murder each other in Japan when it has one of the highest, if not the highest suicide rate anyway :derp:

[StylinRed]

The killer had killed his mom at home already before going to the school to kill the children

according to ABC news


-_-



There's no need for people to murder each other in Japan when it has one of the highest, if not the highest suicide rate anyway :derp:

japans ranked 7th for suicide just above china (south korea is 2nd! holy shit) usa is 38th just above canada








The Facebook guy Ryan, that was posted pages back, is the Older Brother of the murderer! they just showed him on the news! that must be horrible since he was making posts about "it wasn't me, im on the bus headed home" only to find out his parents and brother are dead and that his brother was the murderer :/

[GabAlmighty]

japan has one of the lowest murder rates in the world

there's also strict gun control

the usa has one of the highest murder rates of the developed world and there's no gun control

:)



there's about 2 ppl killed by a firearm a year in Japan
A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths - Max Fisher - The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/)

That stat is also only good for murders which they solve, it doesn't take into account deaths they don't solve and I remember watching a documentary which showed that the police would only take on cases where they would be able to solve the murder easily, thus keeping their murder solve rates high and murder deaths low.

[jonwon]

I'd hardly call being dead "getting away with it"... but whatever.

it saves him from the punishment he would most definitely receive in prison. child molesters/pedophiles are at the top of the list of targets in prison, now imagine what would happen to a child killer.

its very heartbreaking for something like this to happen just before christmas...

[dinosaur]

The Facebook guy Ryan that was posted pages back in the Older Brother of the murderer! they just showed him on the news! that must be horrible since he was making posts about "it wasn't me, im on the bus headed home" only to find out his parents and brother are dead and that his brother was the murderer :/

oh man, thats terrible :(

[Hondaracer]

only his mother is dead:

Police: 20 children among 26 victims of Connecticut school shooting - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html)

[rsx]

only his mother is dead:

Police: 20 children among 26 victims of Connecticut school shooting - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html)

eh?

Within minutes, 26 people were dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School -- 20 of them children. Among the six adults killed were Dawn Hochsprung, the school's beloved principal, and school psychologist Mary Sherlach.

[Hondaracer]

It said that interviewed his father after the shooting

Also comparing Japan and the states is irreverent it's completely different culture
Posted via RS Mobile

[StylinRed]

compare it with canada or the uk or france or italy, etc then

even if you cant have a perfect comparison it still says a lot

[twitchyzero]

Canada has had five similar school shootings since the Columbine Massacre

link?

I only know of the one that happened at Dawson College

[AzNightmare]

Charlie Brooker's Newswipe 25/03/09 - YouTube

:suspicious:
What do you guys think?

[trollface]

Time to buy more guns.

[DanHibiki]

My problem is not with all guns but automatic weapons.

Do people really need to own assault rifles?

[Hondaracer]

that is a misconception as i believe only a handful of states, maybe even only 2 i'm thinking allow fully automatic weapons to be owned by civilians?

As is the perception behind "Black weapons" or Assault rifles, In the states there isnt the stigma there is here in Canada with Assault rifles, i recently watched a documentry that basically summed up how all "Assault" weapons became restricted after the montreal polytechnique massacre

Basically a guy stood in front of a bunch of MP's and asked which guns looked more "threataning" to a panel of people who had no prior knowledge of firearms, the end result was the restriction of guns such as the AR-15, M41A, etc when in reality besides the look, they are no different than a regular hunting rifle

in Canada, these are restricted, IE. you can only take them from your home to a range you have registered to carry it go with the federal government:

http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/1289112556.jpg

http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/52116.jpg

However, the SKS, and CZ are completely legal and can be brought anywhere, carried in a vehicle anywhere, etc.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/SKS-M.png

http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/images/CZ58%202/CZ58.jpg

And they are ALL, essentially the same thing as this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Modern_Hunting_Rifle.jpg

Semi automatic, Magazine/Cartridge fed

Also, in terms of availability the .223 Ammo which the M4 takes is much more expensive than the SKS Ammo, an average person with a valid PAL could buy an SKS and 1000 rounds of Ammunition for under $400

[van_city23]

Just read through some of the comments, it's not that simple to change/amend the gun laws. The entrenchment of the US Constitution makes it very difficult for any changes to occur at all. 2/3 of both Houses of Congress plus 3/4 of the States must ratify the amendment. The last amendment to the constitution was in 1789 I believe. Both the Equal Rights and Child Labor amendments have yet to be passed into the constitution and they were proposed over 40 and 80 years ago.

[SkinnyPupp]

A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths - Max Fisher - The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/)

Some interesting stats there too

" America's gun control laws are the loosest in the developed world and its rate of gun-related homicide is the highest. Of the world's 23 "rich" countries, the U.S. gun-related murder rate is almost 20 times that of the other 22. With almost one privately owned firearm per person, America's ownership rate is the highest in the world; tribal-conflict-torn Yemen is ranked second, with a rate about half of America's. "

[shenmecar]

Police: 20 children among 26 victims of Connecticut school shooting - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/us/connecticut-school-shooting/index.html)


Janet Vollmer, a kindergarten teacher, locked her classroom doors, covered the windows and read a story to her 19 students to keep them calm.

http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/GifGuide/clapping/citizen_cane.gif

[mb_]

Sad, sad story. Many kids went to school today not knowing it would be the last time they ever would. Just before the holidays too, RIP and condolences to the families and friends involved.

[rsx]

Shockingly abhorrent.

[RacingMetro92]

I'm still trying to wonder why many Americans are defending the second amendment to the DEATH as if the founding fathers were God and meant for this loose gun control policy to exist in a modern America when it was drafted in 1791.

It's just sad how some people are saying if some of the teachers had used this right in their classroom the massacre may have been able to be prevented. Right, like some teacher will bring a gun to a class full of children in the supposedly huge chance someone else with a gun will come in.

Some are even saying in comment sections of articles that the second amendment will protect Americans from their own army when they "take away their freedom" because citizens don't have access to helicopters and whatnot.:fulloffuck::seriously:

It's just sad when politics get involved in something like this.

[GabAlmighty]

:suspicious:
What do you guys think?

I agree with the Doc at the end.

[Yodamaster]

Society has always blamed the machine over the individual, society will always blame the individual over society. The society will never blame society because it has to admit that it has failed.

Society did not care about the individual until he used a machine to kill.

Society.

Individual.

Machine.

Not the other way around.

[unit]

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
Posted via RS Mobile

they sure make it easy for 'regular' people to kill lots of individuals in short time though.

[Lomac]

that is a misconception as i believe only a handful of states, maybe even only 2 i'm thinking allow fully automatic weapons to be owned by civilians?

As is the perception behind "Black weapons" or Assault rifles, In the states there isnt the stigma there is here in Canada with Assault rifles, i recently watched a documentry that basically summed up how all "Assault" weapons became restricted after the montreal polytechnique massacre

Basically a guy stood in front of a bunch of MP's and asked which guns looked more "threataning" to a panel of people who had no prior knowledge of firearms, the end result was the restriction of guns such as the AR-15, M41A, etc when in reality besides the look, they are no different than a regular hunting rifle

in Canada, these are restricted, IE. you can only take them from your home to a range you have registered to carry it go with the federal government:

http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/1289112556.jpg

http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/52116.jpg

However, the SKS, and CZ are completely legal and can be brought anywhere, carried in a vehicle anywhere, etc.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/SKS-M.png

http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/images/CZ58%202/CZ58.jpg

And they are ALL, essentially the same thing as this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Modern_Hunting_Rifle.jpg

Semi automatic, Magazine/Cartridge fed

Also, in terms of availability the .223 Ammo which the M4 takes is much more expensive than the SKS Ammo, an average person with a valid PAL could buy an SKS and 1000 rounds of Ammunition for under $400

It's funny how the AR15 and M4 are both considered "evil" looking, yet it's perfectly legal for us to buy a gun that looks like the following and bring it into the bush to shoot...

http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/323835_10150839369785080_736417008_o.jpg

[Hondaracer]

its clearly lost on the people who make the laws..which shows

honestly i've been around guns and hunting most of my life and I would consider myself ultra responsible/educated user and even to me the whole concept of a gun is kind of fucked up, in reality it is such a basic thing compared to the world around us but it has the potential to do so much

[trollface]

I think it's also how "easy" (which is not at all) for Timmy to convert to a select fire weapon in the basement. Anyone remember the Norinco T97's?

[trollface]

My problem is not with all guns but automatic weapons.

Do people really need to own assault rifles?

I think assault is thrown around too much. What exactly changes from an Assault weapon to one that is not? If ppl are grouping select fire weapons into the "assault" group, it honestly makes hardly any difference. An "automatic" weapon is pretty damn hard to control and prob would not increase the number of deaths if someone went nuts with one.

[DanHibiki]

I think assault is thrown around too much. What exactly changes from an Assault weapon to one that is not? If ppl are grouping select fire weapons into the "assault" group, it honestly makes hardly any difference. An "automatic" weapon is pretty damn hard to control and prob would not increase the number of deaths if someone went nuts with one.

If that were true then wouldn't everyone in the military be using a handgun?

[trollface]

If that were true then wouldn't everyone in the military be using a handgun?

Naw, hand guns are actually terrible. The only thing they have going for them is size. That's it.

[j.f0ng]

Super late to this, but I didn't get a chance to educate my self with the incident this afternoon, so I decided to read up on all the new sources just now. I am no where close to being a parent, but I just ran into this picture and it completely wrecked me on the inside :(
http://media.nj.com/jersey-journal/photo/2012/12/-d61969a94f52e07e.jpg

R.I.P to all of the kids, this is absolutely heartbreaking.

[dee242]

The CT Elementary School Shooting - YouTube


this vid sums up my thoughts and rip to the people affected

[pinn3r]

holy fuck.. all i had to do was read the title of this thread and my heart just dropped
RIP

[twitchyzero]

they sure make it easy for 'regular' people to kill lots of individuals in short time though.

actually..this does make sense now...you can only inflict so much damage with a knife on a group of people

a bomb isn't something that 100% of the ingredients are readily available to the public

it's much easier for a nut case to pack some guns and proceed with their plan.

[Jboii59]

fuck this is so sad...rip to everyone who died and my heart goes out to the families

[Jason00S2000]

oh jason you never can just switch off for too long eh


I can't switch off my imagination, no.


Needless to say, I'm not going out this weekend as my mood is very subdued by the somber events on Friday.

[Raid3n]

that is a misconception as i believe only a handful of states, maybe even only 2 i'm thinking allow fully automatic weapons to be owned by civilians?

As is the perception behind "Black weapons" or Assault rifles, In the states there isnt the stigma there is here in Canada with Assault rifles, i recently watched a documentry that basically summed up how all "Assault" weapons became restricted after the montreal polytechnique massacre

Basically a guy stood in front of a bunch of MP's and asked which guns looked more "threataning" to a panel of people who had no prior knowledge of firearms, the end result was the restriction of guns such as the AR-15, M41A, etc when in reality besides the look, they are no different than a regular hunting rifle

in Canada, these are restricted, IE. you can only take them from your home to a range you have registered to carry it go with the federal government:

http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/1289112556.jpg

http://www.gunslot.com/files/gunslot/images/52116.jpg

However, the SKS, and CZ are completely legal and can be brought anywhere, carried in a vehicle anywhere, etc.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/SKS-M.png

http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/images/CZ58%202/CZ58.jpg

And they are ALL, essentially the same thing as this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Modern_Hunting_Rifle.jpg

Semi automatic, Magazine/Cartridge fed

Also, in terms of availability the .223 Ammo which the M4 takes is much more expensive than the SKS Ammo, an average person with a valid PAL could buy an SKS and 1000 rounds of Ammunition for under $400



Semi-Automatic != Bolt action

semi-auto is much more devastating solely by the virtue of rate of fire. you could get of at LEAST 5 shots with the semi-auto in the 1 shot from the bolt action...

thats a bit of a stretch for comparison

[LiquidTurbo]

http://rosiesaysblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/guns_vs_mental_health_political_cartoon.jpg

[Hondaracer]

Semi-Automatic != Bolt action

semi-auto is much more devastating solely by the virtue of rate of fire. you could get of at LEAST 5 shots with the semi-auto in the 1 shot from the bolt action...

thats a bit of a stretch for comparison

Sorry bad pic, but there are plenty of semi auto hunting rifles, moral of the story was guns are banned purely on looks not function
Posted via RS Mobile

[beproud]

Rip

[Ludepower]

im fuking sick to my bones what happen...wish I was there to do something. RIP

[rsx]

Semi-Automatic != Bolt action

semi-auto is much more devastating solely by the virtue of rate of fire. you could get of at LEAST 5 shots with the semi-auto in the 1 shot from the bolt action...

thats a bit of a stretch for comparison

By that logic, handguns are more devastating.

Wasn't it reported that he left his carbine in the car and killed the kids with 2 handguns?

Regardless of a .22LR, 1911 .45 or a .223 carbine, guns kill people.

[racerman88]

RIP and condolences to the families

[Raid3n]

By that logic, handguns are more devastating.

Wasn't it reported that he left his carbine in the car and killed the kids with 2 handguns?

Regardless of a .22LR, 1911 .45 or a .223 carbine, guns kill people.

in close range like that, a handgun would be more devastating... it's a close range gun meant for use in short to medium range and indoors.

and i'm not denying the fact that guns kill people. only reason i would have a gun would be for historical value (wwii buff) or for hunting. and they would always be stored properly..

i just thought it was silly to compare an assault rifle to a bolt action rifle.
but hondaracer clarified that it was just an example, so that issue is moot.

[jlo mein]

Related: local news reporting that the shooter in Clakamas Town Center (Oregon) decided to end shooting spree and shoot himself after he was confronted by a legal gun carrying citizen.

Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter | kgw.com Portland (http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html)

Funny how none of the national media like CNN are running this story.

Reports from the elementary school shooting indicate that staff at the school ran and charged at the shooter bare handed, in attempts to stop him. The situation could have been very different if a responsible staffer was carrying.

I recommend everyone at least listen to and understand the statistics James Yeager (firearms trainer, former law enforcement) states in this video. These stats are pulled from actual shootings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prS_QpGIB8Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[twitchyzero]

right...every kindergarten teacher should have this in his/her classroom
http://www.deviantart.com/download/83016120/In_case_of_Zombies_1_by_Lddrizzt.jpg

[DanHibiki]

I'm sure parents would be thrilled at the idea of teachers carrying guns at an elementary school :suspicious:
Posted via RS Mobile

[Graeme S]

There are two aspects that we need to look at here. One is the long-term, and one is the short-term. In the long-term, tighter gun control is a great portion of the solution. Unfortunately since this shooting seems to have been done with legally acquired guns (though not owned by the shooter himself--early reports say they were his mom's), gun control is not always the answer. Like has been said by many others: crazy people are crazy and will do crazy things to do crazy things.

The second aspect is in the short-term. The situation now. And as far as that goes, having people with the capability to be armed is not necessarily a terrible idea. Those of you who know me will know that I'm hardly a pro-gun person, but I admit realities; in the US, when you ban guns from somewhere, you're only banning the people who care enough to follow the law from carrying guns. And with the number of guns in the US, it's inevitable that someone, somewhere will be carrying a gun somewhere around you during your day or your week.

What's been mentioned elsewhere in this thread is the difference between Canadian and American attitudes towards firearms, and I think it comes from the sense of entitlement Americans have. Canadians require (relative to the Americans) quite a bit of effort and energy in order to get a firearms license. Having these requirements reminds people that a gun is not "just something you carry around with you all the time", it forces people to think about it. In the US in many states when you turn 18 (or 21) you can buy a rifle or handgun, often without training or a background check. This leads to a very casual attitude to guns rather than the respect that they deserve.

America will never get rid of guns, nor of the second amendment. But hopefully, they'll gain a little bit of sense and moderate things a bit.

[Lomac]

Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter | kgw.com Portland (http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html)

Funny how none of the national media like CNN are running this story.

Reports from the elementary school shooting indicate that staff at the school ran and charged at the shooter bare handed, in attempts to stop him. The situation could have been very different if a responsible staffer was carrying.

I recommend everyone at least listen to and understand the statistics James Yeager (firearms trainer, former law enforcement) states in this video. These stats are pulled from actual shootings.

Active Shooter Part II - Get in the FIGHT! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prS_QpGIB8Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

It's kinda like introducing a new animal to an environment to control the population of another species. All you're doing is creating a never ending cycle of replacing one thing with another.

[jlo mein]

It's kinda like introducing a new animal to an environment to control the population of another species. All you're doing is creating a never ending cycle of replacing one thing with another.

I'm perfectly open to having a discussion on the pros and cons of each possible solution.

Many people (especially parents) have a problem with arming staff or teachers. It is not the perfect solution. However under given circumstances in America it seems like a worthwhile thought.

Locking down schools with increased barriers from entry is not a solution. This shooter was the son of a teacher at the school. He was even required to be buzzed in at the front door. Parents as well as other relatives of staff or students will always demand access to their child's school, so locking out all outsiders is impractical.

Arming a select number of staff at a school can be a logical solution using proper training. Parents trust teachers and administrators to be responsible around their children, it's not a stretch to trust them with your child's security. Even just arming several admistrators like a principal and select other few could be a benefit. Law enforcement are a reactionary force with a response time of 3-10 minutes depending on location and city. The fastest response would be to have someone prepared already inside the school. Remember that in this shooting, police arrived after the shooter had already shot himself and ended the event.

I'd like to point out the problems Israel had with terrorists attacking their schools. It is the same as a psychotic active shooter situation. To prevent them, Israel began arming their teachers and having parents as armed guards. In 2002, a terrorist attempted a shooting attack on an Israeli school, but was stopped by armed civilians at the school before he had any chance to do harm.

To everyone that believes tighter gun control is the answer for America, think about how it would need to be implemented, how much it would cost, and how effective it could truly be. There is almost one gun in America for every American citizen. To take away all those guns would be on a scale no government, even America, could ever try to take on.

Everyone needs to read about Chicago gun violence. The state of Illinois has the tightest gun control in all of America. Handguns are banned in Chicago. Yet shooting violence with handguns in Chicago is some of the highest in the country.

This is all ignoring a major fact: the only people that obey the law are law abiding citizens. Law abiding sheep believe gun control will work for America because they all follow the law. Criminals and psychopaths do not obey the law. If they ban guns, they will use black market guns or turn to homemade bombs.

For anyone arguing that knife attacks are less deadly than shooting incidents with China as evidence, needs to look at the facts. For the majority of China knife attacks of recent year, they were conducted with meat cleavers. Cleavers are poor penetrators. The way to kill someone with a gun or a knife is to reach the heart or brain. a standard 6 inch chef's knife used as a stabbing weapon is just as deadly as a gun. Knives require no training to use, they never malfunction, they don't need to be reloaded, and they don't make noise.

[trollface]

Another mall shooting.

Suspect in Fashion Island mall shooting is arrested - latimes.com (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/12/fashion-island-shooting-suspect-arrested.html)

[SkinnyPupp]

The situation could have been very different if a responsible staffer was carrying.



:rukidding:

[SkinnyPupp]

Saw this quote on Facebook

You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.

It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single *victim* of Columbine? Disturbed people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.

CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.

You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news.

[twitchyzero]

watching AC360 last night and he said just said..he didnt wanna keep bringing up the killer's name so that'll become a household name.

[vafanculo]

Saw this quote on Facebook

I totally agree. I wish for the next massacre, the media wouldn't even inform anyone. Really, what good is informing people going to do? Children are dead, the shooter is dead, nothing anybody can do.it's not like the guy lived and there's a warrant for him. Why create such a frenzie? - cause media make money from it.

As for gun control, my 2 cents. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

How many of us have played GTA and gone on killing sprees? I've shot people, picked up hookers made the car rock, then run over the hooker and get my money back, set people on fire, throw grenades, etc. Doesn't mean I would do that in real life.

However, a crazy person will. You can't take a gun from his hands, but you can silence their actions.

Just don't report it. OR.. Toss everyone with mental problems off a cliff.
Posted via RS Mobile

[nabs]

RIP

Charlotte Bacon, 6.
Daniel Barden, 7.
Rachel Davino, 29.
Olivia Engel, 6.
Josephine Gay, 7.
Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 6.
Dylan Hockley, 6.
Dawn Hochsprung, 47.
Madeleine F. Hsu, 6.
Catherine V. Hubbard, 6.
Chase Kowalski, 7.
Nancy Lanza, 52.
Jesse Lewis, 6.
James Mattioli, 6.
Grace McDonnell, 7.
Anne Marie Murphy, 52.
Emilie Parker, 6.
Jack Pinto, 6.
Noah Pozner, 6.
Caroline Previdi, 6.
Jessica Rekos, 6.
Avielle Richman, 6.
Lauren Rousseau, 30.
Mary Sherlach, 56.
Victoria Soto, 27.
Benjamin Wheeler, 6.
Allison N. Wyatt, 6.



This made me tear up just reading though the list.

[rsx]

There was another public shooting this morning, this time at St. Vincent’s Hospital in Birmingham, Ala.

The incident happened around 4am. Police Sergeant Johnny Williams tells FOX6 News that a man with a gun, shot two employees as well as a police officer. A second officer shot and killed the unidentified gunman.

Sgt. Williams says that the injuries to the officer and the employees are not life-threatening. The victims were taken to UAB Hospital. Police have not released their names.

One hospital worker says a “Code Silver” was called across the intercom. He says “Code Silver” means there is harm or threat with a weapon. He says employees are instructed to call 911.

[Harvey Specter]

So sad when I look at the list of victims, I can't begin to imagine what the parents are going through.

[Harvey Specter]

Piers Morgan Explodes At Gun Advocate - YouTube

[MindBomber]

I'm perfectly open to having a discussion on the pros and cons of each possible solution.

Many people (especially parents) have a problem with arming staff or teachers. It is not the perfect solution. However under given circumstances in America it seems like a worthwhile thought.

Locking down schools with increased barriers from entry is not a solution. This shooter was the son of a teacher at the school. He was even required to be buzzed in at the front door. Parents as well as other relatives of staff or students will always demand access to their child's school, so locking out all outsiders is impractical.

Arming a select number of staff at a school can be a logical solution using proper training. Parents trust teachers and administrators to be responsible around their children, it's not a stretch to trust them with your child's security. Even just arming several admistrators like a principal and select other few could be a benefit. Law enforcement are a reactionary force with a response time of 3-10 minutes depending on location and city. The fastest response would be to have someone prepared already inside the school. Remember that in this shooting, police arrived after the shooter had already shot himself and ended the event.

Right, because the people with a mental disposition appropriate for educating elementary students are often equally suited to a role as a close-quarters urban combat soldier.

If I were a parent, and teachers were ever allowed to carry firearms, I'd start home schooling.

I'd like to point out the problems Israel had with terrorists attacking their schools. It is the same as a psychotic active shooter situation. To prevent them, Israel began arming their teachers and having parents as armed guards. In 2002, a terrorist attempted a shooting attack on an Israeli school, but was stopped by armed civilians at the school before he had any chance to do harm.


Israel is surrounded by armies hell bent on it being wiped off the face of the Earth. America is bordered my us, Canadians, who aren't exactly threatening, and Mexico, who also is not more than a minor threat and only along the border. You've made a false analogy: what works for Isreal does not necessarily work for America.

To everyone that believes tighter gun control is the answer for America, think about how it would need to be implemented, how much it would cost, and how effective it could truly be. There is almost one gun in America for every American citizen. To take away all those guns would be on a scale no government, even America, could ever try to take on.


If America placed an equivalent effort to restricting access to firearms detrimental to its society as foreign policy, they could have a country almost free of firearm violence. That's a novel idea, America focusing on its own internal issues instead of the internal issues of a sovereign nation. :lol


Everyone needs to read about Chicago gun violence. The state of Illinois has the tightest gun control in all of America. Handguns are banned in Chicago. Yet shooting violence with handguns in Chicago is some of the highest in the country.


Yes, because guns are still easily brought into Illinous and cities therein from neighboring areas. The effectiveness of firearms restrictions in Illinous are fundamentally underminded by the laxness of them in neighboring states.


This is all ignoring a major fact: the only people that obey the law are law abiding citizens. Law abiding sheep believe gun control will work for America because they all follow the law. Criminals and psychopaths do not obey the law. If they ban guns, they will use black market guns or turn to homemade bombs.

As a PAL/RPAL holder, I can list several locations where I could purchase a firearm with no difficulty. I could not tell you where I could buy an illegal gun; I don't even know where I would start looking, it's not like I could pick one up off Craigslist. I also do not know how to build an IED; I could theoretically find a set of plans on the internet, but it would be a much more arduous process than stopping by the local gun store. You've proved one point: a person intent on killing people can find a way; you've not acknowledged another key fact, it's a lot harder to kill people when you do not have easy (read: legal) access to a firearm.


For anyone arguing that knife attacks are less deadly than shooting incidents with China as evidence, needs to look at the facts. For the majority of China knife attacks of recent year, they were conducted with meat cleavers. Cleavers are poor penetrators. The way to kill someone with a gun or a knife is to reach the heart or brain. a standard 6 inch chef's knife used as a stabbing weapon is just as deadly as a gun. Knives require no training to use, they never malfunction, they don't need to be reloaded, and they don't make noise.

I would prefer a person who aspires to murder me possess a knife, any knife, even an axe, or a sword, over any firearm, aside from maybe a muzzle loading design. The effectiveness of a weapon is intrinsically tied to its range, and therefore a firearm is infinitely superior to any weapon with a limited range except in very select circumstances. The argument you've made is a desperate, and futile, attempt at defending any entitlement to gun ownership above the bare minimum, which ultimately speaks to the poor case for it in an evolved society. Just to further prove my already thoroughly proven point, pick any public venue, shopping mall, school, movie theater, and tell me, would you rather face a person with a semi-automatic rifle or handgun, or knife?

RIP

Charlotte Bacon, 6.
Daniel Barden, 7.
Rachel Davino, 29.
Olivia Engel, 6.
Josephine Gay, 7.
Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 6.
Dylan Hockley, 6.
Dawn Hochsprung, 47.
Madeleine F. Hsu, 6.
Catherine V. Hubbard, 6.
Chase Kowalski, 7.
Nancy Lanza, 52.
Jesse Lewis, 6.
James Mattioli, 6.
Grace McDonnell, 7.
Anne Marie Murphy, 52.
Emilie Parker, 6.
Jack Pinto, 6.
Noah Pozner, 6.
Caroline Previdi, 6.
Jessica Rekos, 6.
Avielle Richman, 6.
Lauren Rousseau, 30.
Mary Sherlach, 56.
Victoria Soto, 27.
Benjamin Wheeler, 6.
Allison N. Wyatt, 6.



This made me tear up just reading though the list.

Victoria Soto ordered her first graders to climb into cabinets, and not make a sound.

When the gunman reached Victoria's classroom, she told him her students were in the gym.

The gunman shot Victoria, and proceeded on with his killing spree.

Victoria died an incredible hero, there are many children who owe their lives to her today.

Sorry bad pic, but there are plenty of semi auto hunting rifles, moral of the story was guns are banned purely on looks not function
Posted via RS Mobile

I'll say this -

I've never known it necessary to fire multiple shots when hunting. I've only ever had the opportunity to make a single shot, if I were to miss the animal would have escaped before there was the opportunity to made another good shot. I've never hunted ducks, grouse, or other bird species, they might be an exception. That being the case, it seems unnecessary for operations that allow more than one shot to be made in relatively quick succession to be legal. I know you, Hondaracer, have more firearms and hunting experience than myself. I've only been hunting a couple dozen times, and usually with a bow. Tell me if my opinion is totally ignorant to some key fact.

[FN-2199]

Piers Morgan Explodes At Gun Advocate - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgYMOZD6xtc)

The answer to the gun problem is more guns? You can't blame him for blowing up.

[Excelsis]

meanwhile..
Drone strikes kill, maim and traumatize too many civilians, U.S. study says - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world/asia/pakistan-us-drone-strikes/index.html)

U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan have killed far more people than the United States has acknowledged, have traumatized innocent residents and largely been ineffective, according to a new study released Tuesday.
The study by Stanford Law School and New York University's School of Law calls for a re-evaluation of the practice, saying the number of "high-level" targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low -- about 2%.
The report accuses Washington of misrepresenting drone strikes as "a surgically precise and effective tool that makes the U.S. safer," saying that in reality, "there is significant evidence that U.S. drone strikes have injured and killed civilians."
It also casts doubts on Washington's claims that drone strikes produce zero to few civilian casualties and alleges that the United States makes "efforts to shield the drone program from democratic accountability."
Obama reflects on drone warfare use Drones in Action
The drone strike program has long been controversial, with conflicting reports on its impact from U.S. and Pakistani officials and independent organizations.
President Barack Obama told CNN last month that a target must meet "very tight and very strict standards," and John Brennan, the president's top counter-terrorism adviser, said in April that in "exceedingly rare" cases, civilians have been "accidentally injured, or worse, killed in these strikes."
In contrast to more conservative U.S. statements, the Stanford/NYU report -- titled "Living Under Drones" -- offers starker figures published by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, an independent organization based at City University in London.
"TBIJ reports that from June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were civilians, including 176 children. TBIJ reports that these strikes also injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals," according to the Stanford/NYU study.
Based on interviews with witnesses, victims and experts, the report accuses the CIA of "double-striking" a target, moments after the initial hit, thereby killing first responders.
It also highlights harm "beyond death and physical injury," publishing accounts of psychological trauma experienced by people living in Pakistan's tribal northwest region, who it says hear drones hover 24 hours a day.
"Before this we were all very happy," the report quotes an anonymous resident as saying. "But after these drones attacks a lot of people are victims and have lost members of their family. A lot of them, they have mental illnesses."
People have to live with the fear that a strike could come down on them at any moment of the day or night, leaving behind dead whose "bodies are shattered to pieces," and survivors who must be desperately sped to a hospital.
The report concedes that "real threats to U.S. security and to Pakistani civilians exist in the Pakistani border areas now targeted by drones." And it acknowledges that drone strikes have "killed alleged combatants and disrupted armed actor networks."
But it concludes that drone strikes, which are conducted by the CIA in a country not at war with the United States, are too harmful to civilians, too sloppy, legally questionable and do more harm to U.S. interests than good.
"A significant rethinking of current U.S. targeted killing and drone strike policies is long overdue," it says. "U.S. policy-makers, and the American public, cannot continue to ignore evidence of the civilian harm and counter-productive impacts of U.S. targeted killings and drone strikes in Pakistan."
The study recommends that Washington undertake measures to rectify collateral damage -- including making public detailed legal justification for strikes, implementing mechanisms transparently to account for civilian casualties, ensuring independent investigations into drone strike deaths, prosecuting cases of civilian casualties and compensating civilians harmed by U.S. strikes in Pakistan.
Nine months of research went into the report, according to its authors, which included "two investigations in Pakistan, more than 130 interviews with victims, witnesses, and experts, and review of thousands of pages of documentation and media reporting."
U.S. authorities have largely kept quiet on the subject of drone strikes in Pakistan.
However, the use of armed drones to target and kill suspected terrorists has increased dramatically during the Obama administration, according to Peter Bergen, CNN's national security analyst and a director at the New America Foundation, a Washington-based think tank that monitors drone strikes.
Obama has already authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan, six times more than the number during President George W. Bush's eight years in office, Bergen wrote earlier this month. As a result, the number of estimated deaths from the Obama administration's drone strikes is more than four times what it was during the Bush administration -- somewhere between 1,494 and 2,618.
However, an analysis by the New America Foundation says that the civilian casualty rate from drone strikes has been dropping sharply since 2008 despite the rising death toll.
"The number of civilians plus those individuals whose precise status could not be determined from media reports -- labeled 'unknowns' by NAF -- reported killed by drones in Pakistan during Obama's tenure in office were 11% of fatalities," said Bergen. "So far in 2012 it is close to 2%. Under President Bush it was 33%."
The foundation's analysis relies on credible media outlets in Pakistan, which in turn rely on Pakistani officials and local villagers' accounts, Bergen said, rather than on U.S. figures.
The drone program is deeply unpopular in Pakistan, where the national parliament voted in April to end any authorization for it. This, however, was "a vote that the United States government has simply ignored," according to Bergen.
Obama told CNN's Jessica Yellin this month that the use of armed drones was "something that you have to struggle with."
"If you don't, then it's very easy to slip into a situation in which you end up bending rules thinking that the ends always justify the means," he continued. "That's not been our tradition. That's not who we are as a country."
Obama also addressed his criteria for lethal action in the interview, although he repeatedly declined to acknowledge any direct involvement in selecting targets.
"It has to be a target that is authorized by our laws. It has to be a threat that is serious and not speculative. It has to be a situation in which we can't capture the individual before they move forward on some sort of operational plot against the United States," Obama said.
His security adviser, Brennan, gave the Obama administration's first public justification for drone strikes in his April speech at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think-tank.
Such strikes are used when capture is not a feasible option and are conducted "in full accordance with the law," Brennan said.
"We only authorize a strike if we have a high degree of confidence that innocent civilians will not be injured or killed, except in the rarest of circumstances," he said.
Despite the "extraordinary precautions" taken by the United States, Brennan said, civilians "have been accidentally injured, or worse, killed in these strikes. It is exceedingly rare, but it has happened. When it does, it pains us, and we regret it deeply, as we do any time innocents are killed in war."
Brennan also cited the "the seriousness, the extraordinary care" taken by Obama and his national security team in deciding whether to use lethal force.
The London-based rights organization Reprieve, which with the help of a partner organization in Pakistan facilitated access to some of the people interviewed for the Stanford/NYU study, backed its finding that the drone program causes wider damage than is acknowledged by the U.S. government.
"This shows that drone strikes go much further than simply killing innocent civilians. An entire region is being terrorized by the constant threat of death from the skies," said Reprieve's director, Clive Stafford Smith.
"Their way of life is collapsing: kids are too terrified to go to school, adults are afraid to attend weddings, funerals, business meetings, or anything that involves gathering in groups. Yet there is no end in sight, and nowhere the ordinary men, women and children of North West Pakistan can go to feel safe."

[SkinnyPupp]

meanwhile..
Drone strikes kill, maim and traumatize too many civilians, U.S. study says - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world/asia/pakistan-us-drone-strikes/index.html)
the fuck does that have to do with this?

[donjalapeno]

Morgan Freeman has it right with this statement, but i still feel like their shouldnt be Gun stores at every corner.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/396995_10151145627997271_1543161663_n.jpg

[CharlesInCharge]

When they control the banks, media and FDA... groom children to be soldiers through various media, put mass numbers of people on antipsychotic drugs... is it any surprise that his medication is not in the spot light here?
Theses drugs are synonymous with shootings and suicides and are given out like candy to full fill an agenda, and not help people from my conclusions.

[StylinRed]

one of the teachers is from Winnipeg i hear


and the shooters mom is supposedly a "doomsday prepper" preparing for the financial collapse of the US/world

[AzNightmare]

Morgan Freeman has it right with this statement, but i still feel like their shouldnt be Gun stores at every corner.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/396995_10151145627997271_1543161663_n.jpg

I totally agree. Basically saying the same thing from the video I posted 2 pages ago.

Although I don't know is this good or bad... but I actually don't remember any of the killers names...
nor do I really remember the event altogether after a few weeks or so, unless it's brought up again...

:pokerface:


Anyway,

When she became aware there was a gunman in the school, she hid her first-graders in closets and cabinets, then told the shooter they were in the gym.
He turned the gun on Soto, killing her, but none of her students were harmed.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/27893_10151178360515143_520083557_n.jpg

http://www.newstimes.com/local/article/Teacher-from-Stratford-shielded-students-4120759.php

[SkinnyPupp]

one of the teachers is from Winnipeg i hear


and the shooters mom is supposedly a "doomsday prepper" preparing for the financial collapse of the US/world
So his mom is mental too

Well anyone with 2 handguns and an assault rifle has to be at least a little bit mental. What possible good can come from owning these?

[Gumby]

So his mom is mental too

Well anyone with 2 handguns and an assault rifle has to be at least a little bit mental. What possible good can come from owning these?
Ok I'll agree that being a "doomsday prepper" is mental, but owning 2 handguns and an assault rifle doesn't equate to being mental.

Edit: I mean, if a random person had 2 handguns and an assault rifle, that doesn't automatically make him/her mental.

[Harvey Specter]

The answer to the gun problem is more guns? You can't blame him for blowing up.

Doesn't really surprise me to hear that coming from a gun supporter and after any mass shootings a NRA supporter will usually come out and say something like "if one of the victims had access to a gun, he/she could have killed the shooter".

[Harvey Specter]

Ok I'll agree that being a "doomsday prepper" is mental, but owning 2 handguns and an assault rifle doesn't equate to being mental.

Well the mother obviously thought the world was going to end so she must have been preparing by loading up on guns and ammos. God knows what nonsense she was feeding her son.

I also read that the school had just implicated a new security system, I wonder if there was some sort of threat against students or teachers that made the principle get increased security.

[Yodamaster]

So his mom is mental too

Well anyone with 2 handguns and an assault rifle has to be at least a little bit mental. What possible good can come from owning these?


Worst. Assumption. Ever.

[jlo mein]

Right, because the people with a mental disposition appropriate for educating elementary students are often equally suited to a role as a close-quarters urban combat soldier.

I would not stoop to insulting educators. In this very shooting incident, the principal and his office staff were killed after they heard shots and tried to run after the shooter to stop him. We already know many teachers exposed themselves into the gunman's line of fire to grab students and rush them back into their classrooms.

If educators are that responsible under these terrible circumstances, why would you not trust them to defend your children using a tool more appropriate than their bare hands?

Please watch the video and look at James Yeager's shooting incident statistics. 50% of shooting incidents are stopped by opposition to the shooter. 2/3's of those stopped incidents are by civilian opposition. Out of those cases, 8/10 civilians were unarmed.

In this incident, unarmed civilians tried to stop the shooter and failed. They had the mindset to stop him, but not the required resources.



Israel is surrounded by armies hell bent on it being wiped off the face of the Earth. America is bordered my us, Canadians, who aren't exactly threatening, and Mexico, who also is not more than a minor threat and only along the border. You've made a false analogy: what works for Isreal does not necessarily work for America.

Israel is under attack by terrorists. Guess what? America is under attack by terrorists. All these mentally ill shooters trying to make news headlines in America are by definition terrorists: a person who terrorizes or frightens others with violence.

When are people going to learn that these psychopaths are specifically targeting people and areas that are defenseless. Virginia Tech? Gun Free Zone. The Colorado theatre shooting? Gun Free Zone. The Oregon Clakamas Town Center shooting? Gun Free Zone. This incident? Every elementary and high school in America is a Gun Free Zone.

various gun control arguments

Many people believe gun control can work, but don't specifically mention what kind of measures could be applied to America specifically that can stop these tragedies. Unlike other countries that introduced control laws for populations that were relatively unarmed, America has a significant number of guns under private ownership. I have not heard of a reasonable gun control solution for America yet. The argument for "go door to door and demand all guns in the home" is invalid.

Another reminder is that gun violence does happen in strict gun control countries. Norway has some of the toughest restrictions in the world and they had one of the worst shooting incidents in history.

Norway's gun laws prove easy to ignore (http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/24/norway-strict-gun-laws-circumvented)

In regards to the knife vs gun violence arguments, they're both bad. With enough searching I can come up with a long list of knives being effective mass murder weapons.

Here's a list of only bladed weapon attacks at Chinese school in 2010.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010%E2%80%932011)

Here's another random violence incident where a knife was very effective. These news stories are easy to find.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/241709/chinese-teen-kills-9-in-knife-attack-reports

My argument is that there needs to be less focus on restricting weapons these terrible people are using, and more focus on making sure there are less terrible people.

[jlo mein]

Doesn't really surprise me to hear that coming from a gun supporter and after any mass shootings a NRA supporter will usually come out and say something like "if one of the victims had access to a gun, he/she could have killed the shooter".

The problem is that the national news media avoids publishing news about armed citizens stopping crime.

University study confirms private guns stop crime 2.5 million times a year (http://rense.com/general76/univ.htm)

Remember that Clakamas, Oregon mall shooting from a couple days ago that this school shooting has now eclipsed? Guess what made that shooter think twice about continuing his rampage?

Armed Clackamas Man Confronts Mall Shooter (http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html)

Funny how the local Oregon news has now figured out this story, when there's no mention of it on national news like CNN, even when CNN was covering that event like crazy at the time, and incorrectly first reporting that police stopped the Oregon shooter.

A CNN executive was involved in a debate regarding why national media downplays incidents in which law abidding armed citizens stop violent crime. He was quoted as saying "We don't want to encourage copycat vigilantism."

Isn't it odd that:
The media knows there will be copycats of things they report on.
The media gives excessive coverage to mass murder.
The media rarely reports that armed response by private citizens stops crime

You can listen to it here:
http://armedamericanradio.org/?s=aurora

[Excelsis]

the fuck does that have to do with this?

because on the other side of the world people are getting killed in larger numbers..:suspicious:

[StylinRed]

its just a story that some 20yr old claims was the reason the killing spree stopped because the shooter supposedly saw another guy with a gun he doesnt even know if the shooter fired his last shot after supposedly seeing him with a gun... he ran into a store to hide

[SkinnyPupp]

because on the other side of the world people are getting killed in larger numbers..:suspicious:
So start a fucking thread about it

[SkinnyPupp]

Ok I'll agree that being a "doomsday prepper" is mental, but owning 2 handguns and an assault rifle doesn't equate to being mental.

Edit: I mean, if a random person had 2 handguns and an assault rifle, that doesn't automatically make him/her mental.
Not totally mental, but a little bit. No normal person would ever think they would need two handguns and an assault rifle at home. It's not for hunting, it's not for sport, what is it for? "self defense" in a Connecticut suburb? :fuckthatshit:

[DanHibiki]

Not totally mental, but a little bit. No normal person would ever think they would need two handguns and an assault rifle at home. It's not for hunting, it's not for sport, what is it for? "self defense" in a Connecticut suburb? :fuckthatshit:

They probably just like guns. We all collect a bunch of useless crap so I assume owning many guns can fall under the hobby category. I also assume they take it down to the shooting range to use...

[vafanculo]

Not totally mental, but a little bit. No normal person would ever think they would need two handguns and an assault rifle at home. It's not for hunting, it's not for sport, what is it for? "self defense" in a Connecticut suburb? :fuckthatshit:

Could be a hobby, or collection. Some people like to horde shoes, maybe their fetish were guns.

But, if that were the case, the mom is an idiot for not locking them away safely.

But, it said he failed to buy a gun the day before, so did her mom buy these, or did he?

[bloodmack]

dunno if someone has posted this video, but it sums up how we should actually approach these situations. Charlie Brooker's Newswipe 25/03/09 - YouTube

[jlo mein]

Two small pieces that I would like to contribute:

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/920/rtc2.jpg

20 years ago many less American states issued CCW permits to civilians. in 2010 you can see now the majority of states grant CCW permits. Homicide rates per 100,000 have dropped nearly by half within that time (bottom of diagram).

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/5893/homicideinthecanada1926.gif

Here is the homicide rate in Canada throughout history. Before 1978, there was very little gun control in Canada. Handguns, while registered, were legal for carry. Fully automatic weapons were legal. Magazine capacities were unrestricted.

[MindBomber]

I would not stoop to insulting educators. In this very shooting incident, the principal and his office staff were killed after they heard shots and tried to run after the shooter to stop him. We already know many teachers exposed themselves into the gunman's line of fire to grab students and rush them back into their classrooms.

If educators are that responsible under these terrible circumstances, why would you not trust them to defend your children using a tool more appropriate than their bare hands?

Please watch the video and look at James Yeager's shooting incident statistics. 50% of shooting incidents are stopped by opposition to the shooter. 2/3's of those stopped incidents are by civilian opposition. Out of those cases, 8/10 civilians were unarmed.

In this incident, unarmed civilians tried to stop the shooter and failed. They had the mindset to stop him, but not the required resources.


I did not at any point insult educators, nor would I ever. I'll elaborate further.

A person who reacts to something in a moment of need, spontaneously without predilection, is not comparable to a person poised and actively training for that aforementioned moment. Sit down and have a conversation with a police officer, doctor, soldier, and kindergarten teacher; they possess distinctly different psyches that lead them to their chosen professions, which is only further reinforced by their occupations. Toggling between those psyches is not possible. I would not allow a person who spends Pro-D days in shoot houses to educate, and thereby influence, my child.


Israel is under attack by terrorists. Guess what? America is under attack by terrorists. All these mentally ill shooters trying to make news headlines in America are by definition terrorists: a person who terrorizes or frightens others with violence.

When are people going to learn that these psychopaths are specifically targeting people and areas that are defenseless. Virginia Tech? Gun Free Zone. The Colorado theatre shooting? Gun Free Zone. The Oregon Clakamas Town Center shooting? Gun Free Zone. This incident? Every elementary and high school in America is a Gun Free Zone.


Israel is at war, it is being attacked by nations with a clear agenda. Israel cannot prevent the attacks from occurring, because they are launched or facilitated by sovereign foreign powers which they cannot influence. Israel must therefore cope, and as a result it is basically a giant military base.

America is occasionally attacked by a lone mentally ill person, the attackers act alone with no clear agenda other than to hurt people and usually commit suicide. America has the power to influence the people who attack it, because the attacks arise internally and are facilitated by policies on guns and treatment of the mentally ill.

I never said, America is not under attack by terrorists. I agree, the attackers are terrorists, but they're a different breed and must be handled in a different manner. Both my Civic and a Ferrari are cars, they possess many of the same features, an engine, wheels, tires, seats, and et cetera, but ultimately are totally different. I would apply that concept to a comparison of Isreal and its attackers to America and its attackers.


Many people believe gun control can work, but don't specifically mention what kind of measures could be applied to America specifically that can stop these tragedies. Unlike other countries that introduced control laws for populations that were relatively unarmed, America has a significant number of guns under private ownership. I have not heard of a reasonable gun control solution for America yet. The argument for "go door to door and demand all guns in the home" is invalid.

Another reminder is that gun violence does happen in strict gun control countries. Norway has some of the toughest restrictions in the world and they had one of the worst shooting incidents in history.

Norway's gun laws prove easy to ignore (http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/24/norway-strict-gun-laws-circumvented)


How to reduce the number of dangerous guns in America is a very difficult issue, and I won't pretend to be capable of coming up with one spontaneously.

There needs to be a starting point however, and that's simple - stop selling guns that facilitate these types of attacks, and change the constitution that entitles people to own them. Another potentially very effective step in the long term, restrict the sale of bullets.


In regards to the knife vs gun violence arguments, they're both bad. With enough searching I can come up with a long list of knives being effective mass murder weapons.

Here's a list of only bladed weapon attacks at Chinese school in 2010.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010%E2%80%932011)

Here's another random violence incident where a knife was very effective. These news stories are easy to find.

Chinese teen kills 9 in knife attack (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/241709/chinese-teen-kills-9-in-knife-attack-reports)

My argument is that there needs to be less focus on restricting weapons these terrible people are using, and more focus on making sure there are less terrible people.

A blade can be a very effective killing tool, I don't dispute that at all.

A truck is another very effective killing tool, mowing down a group of students would not be too difficult.

A firearm like the type used is more effective, vastly more, and it is not an absolutely essential societal tool like a knife or truck.


Two small pieces that I would like to contribute:

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/920/rtc2.jpg

20 years ago many less American states issued CCW permits to civilians. in 2010 you can see now the majority of states grant CCW permits. Homicide rates per 100,000 have dropped nearly by half within that time (bottom of diagram).

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/5893/homicideinthecanada1926.gif

Here is the homicide rate in Canada throughout history. Before 1978, there was very little gun control in Canada. Handguns, while registered, were legal for carry. Fully automatic weapons were legal. Magazine capacities were unrestricted.


MAJOR societal changes are not accounted for in these charts.

It's like saying, gun ownership has less restrictions put in place in xxxx area, and no youth outreach programs, police initiatives, social changes, ever took place or had an effect. The extremely narrow focus of those charts make them difficult to consider with much weight.

[BillyBishop]

20 years ago many less American states issued CCW permits to civilians. in 2010 you can see now the majority of states grant CCW permits. Homicide rates per 100,000 have dropped nearly by half within that time (bottom of diagram).

Though certainly pertinent, that correlation is definitely not as clear cut as you make it out to be. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the relationship is strictly spurious, but to ignore other factors would be extremely shortsighted.

[twitchyzero]

So his mom is mental too

Well anyone with 2 handguns and an assault rifle has to be at least a little bit mental. What possible good can come from owning these?

that's like asking why some RS members have bikes and a 2nd car when their first car serves its purpose.

tons of american collect guns..it's a hobby...in some states you don't even need to go to the range to use them.

[iEatClams]

China attack illustrates U.S. gun law divide - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/15/world/asia/china-us-school-attack/index.html?hpt=hp_c2)


Hong Kong (CNN) -- On Friday morning, a man walked through the entrance of an elementary school and, without warning, began ruthlessly cutting down children at the school. Before he was subdued, nearly two dozen were hit.
While it sounds like the horrific massacre in Connecticut, this attack took place about 8,000 miles away in central China. And while several of the victims were reported in critical condition, none of the 22 children were killed. The 36-year-old suspect in China -- which has strict gun control laws -- attacked the children with a knife, according to local reports.
"The huge difference between this case and the U.S. is not the suspect, nor the situation, but the simple fact he did not have an effective weapon," said Dr. Ding Xueliang, a Harvard-educated sociologist at the University of Science and Technology in Hong Kong.
As the world shares in the horror of the attack that left at least 28 dead, including 20 school children, the attack has rekindled the gun-control debate in the U.S. and international wonder at the propensity of gun-related deaths in America.
Police: 20 children among 26 victims

Wei Jingru, a primary school student injured in a knife attack, receives medical treatment in a hospital.
"In terms of the U.S., there's much easier availability of killing instruments -- rifles, machine guns, explosives -- than in nearly every other developed country," Dr. Ding said.

"In the United States, we had 9,000 people killed with guns last year, in similar countries like Germany 170 (killed with guns), in Canada 150. There's a reason for that," Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, told CNN's Piers Morgan.
"The proof in the pudding is that in every other industrialized nation except the United States, they have reasonable gun control laws, and they have hundreds of people killed each year -- not 9,000 or 10,000 a year -- killed by guns."

Analysis: Why gun controls are off the agenda in America
The United States has, by far, the highest rate of gun ownership in the world, with 88.8 guns per 100 people, followed by Serbia (58.2), Yemen (54.8) and Finland/Switzerland (45.7 each), according to GunPolicy.org, an international database at the University of Sydney.
While nations such as South Africa, El Salvador and Thailand have much higher rates of gun homicides per year, the United States rate of 3.12 deaths per 100,000 people is the highest among industrialized nations.
How do we stop the violence?
How the tragedy unfolded Worldwide reaction to school shooting Shooter described as 'nice kid'
But as the attack in China Friday shows, no nation is immune from incidents of mass violence. In July 2011, a gunman killed 77 people in a bomb attack and gun rampage in Norway. Anders Behring Breivik was sentenced to 21 years in prison for the crime last August. In 1996 a gunman killed 16 children and their teacher in the town of Dunblane, Scotland. The year before that, 35 people were killed in a shooting in Port Arthur, Tasmania.
The attack Friday in China recalled a spate of fatal attacks by knife and cleaver-wielding culprits targeting school children in 2010. In April that year, Chinese authorities executed a man who killed eight children in a knife attack the month before. There were three more attacks in the same year injuring at least 44 children.
Who was the suspect Adam Lanza?
A number of measures were introduced at the time, including increased security at schools across the country and a regulation requiring people to register with their national ID cards when buying large knives.
Dr. Ding, the Hong Kong sociologist, said mainland China schools he has visited in the past two years have beefed up security in the wake of the knife attacks.
"I think these kind of attacks become more frequent in many countries, not just China and U.S., because of a number of different factors," Ding said. "Number one is the increased pressure for individuals. Today's world is very different from the world we saw 50 years ago ... individuals in their daily life face much more uncertainty, risk, financial pressure and competition."
"The second thing is we live in a global village now, where the spread of information -- especially bad news -- is so instantaneous," said Ding, leading to more copycat crimes across the globe.
"I don't think we should limit the free press ... but people are watching this, they are learning from these kind of attacks. They are becoming more and more organized, better planned -- and that is horrible."

[SkinnyPupp]

Could be a hobby, or collection. Some people like to horde shoes, maybe their fetish were guns.

But, if that were the case, the mom is an idiot for not locking them away safely.

But, it said he failed to buy a gun the day before, so did her mom buy these, or did he?

Ok so if normal people collect things like shoes or model toys, who collects killing instruments? Not model guns or replicas mind you, actual guns that kill people (like herself for instance)
Posted via RS Mobile

[Manic!]

One of the victims had just moved with their family from Winnipeg two months ago.

Girl killed in Connecticut shooting lived in Winnipeg - Manitoba - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/12/15/mb-connecticut-shooting-winnipeg-victim-connection.html)

[jlo mein]

I did not at any point insult educators, nor would I ever. I'll elaborate further.

A person who reacts to something in a moment of need, spontaneously without predilection, is not comparable to a person poised and actively training for that aforementioned moment.

Any fight will be determined by three factors: mindset, training, and tools. You must have the mindset that you will stop the threat regardless of harm to yourself and you will not back down. The principal and several teachers in this incident showed they had this proper mindset. Mindset is the only part of the three that cannot be given or learned.

For educators that have the right mindset, all they need is the training and tools. They can be trained to use weapons to defend themselves and students. Believe it or not, if educators were given one week and then 2 days per year afterwards of firearms and active shooter training, they would be more trained than half the Law Enforcement officers in North America.


Israel is at war, it is being attacked by nations with a clear agenda. Israel cannot prevent the attacks from occurring, because they are launched or facilitated by sovereign foreign powers which they cannot influence.

Israel HAS prevented attacks from occuring. Since the Ma'alot Massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma'alot_massacre) in 1974 which followed many other terrorist shootings at schools, Israel has armed civilians at many school grounds. Since then, terrorist gunman attacking Israeli schools has been virtually non-existent. One 2002 incident involved no students harmed, and the armed civilians killing a terrorist gunman.

America has the power to influence the people who attack it, because the attacks arise internally and are facilitated by policies on guns and treatment of the mentally ill.

Agreed. So it comes down to two different solutions to a problem with many favouring one. Yet that one solution doesn't prevent the problem, it only attempts to deal with the means to commit a tragedy.

I think it was posted earlier in this thread: society has no problems blaming a tool or machine because it cannot be personified and has no logic or reason of its own. Society cannot blame the person because that would mean society failed him.

MAJOR societal changes are not accounted for in these charts.

I agree. I was hoping that posting these diagrams would lead to a dialogue, especially the American CCW and homicide statistics. I would like to know what evidence everyone has of other changes from 1991 to 2010 that could lead to the homicide rate dropping.

Though certainly pertinent, that correlation is definitely not as clear cut as you make it out to be. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the relationship is strictly spurious, but to ignore other factors would be extremely shortsighted.

That's the right thing to wonder. I urge you to now counter those diagrams, especially the American one since this is about American shootings. Especially interesting is that the scope (1991-2010) encompasses the entire American Assault Weapons Ban, from 1994-2004, yet in 2010 homicides are still below 1991 levels.

I find this very relevant because all these shooting incidents are happening around the time Obama is talking about renewing the Assault Weapons Ban. Is the Assault Weapons Ban effective at preventing these incidents? (aside: the Columbine shooting occured in 1999 while the Assault Weapons Ban was still in place). Is it a "feel good" law that gives people a false sense of security without addressing the root issue?

[jlo mein]

Looking up the 1999 Columbine shooting now and the aftermath is very intriguing. This is a similar type event with high media coverage that occured 13 years ago now.

Columbine High School massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre#Impact_on_school_po licies)

A United States Secret Service study concluded that schools... should be paying more attention to the pre-attack behaviors of students. Zero-tolerance policies and metal detectors "are unlikely to be helpful," ....The researchers focused on questions concerning the reliance on SWAT teams when most attacks are over before police arrive

Most schools have now implemented "lockdown" plans in case of active shooter scenarios. Teachers at the elementary school shooting followed this plan. The plan is to lock your classrooms and wait for police assistance. Notice that this contradicts the Secret Service study which raises concerns of over reliance on police intervention.

Does a lockdown plan save lives? I'm very sure it saved many lives in this most recent incident. Did it do anything to help the 26 victims shot? No.

In May 2002 the Secret Service published a report that examined 37 US school shootings. They had the following findings:
Incidents of targeted violence at school were rarely sudden, impulsive acts.
Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker's idea and/or plan to attack.
Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.


What is VERY interesting in the Wiki article is that it has a whole section dedicated to gun control measures implemented afterwards, but only has ONE sentence related to addressing the behavior of the perpetrators:

"some schools across America have renewed existing anti-bullying policies"

Further reading has revealed to me that most of these anti-bullying policies involve no preventative measures, they only suspend or expel students that are accused of bullying. This contradicts the Secret Service study posted in the Wiki page which states "expulsion is the spark that pushes some to return to school with a gun".

Why is it that after all of these events that happen time and again, everyone lobbies for gun control, and new gun control measures are actually implemented with shootings still happening, yet very little of the aftermath discusses the psychopaths themselves?

Wikipedia Virginia Tech Massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre)
-A whole section dedicated to gun politics, absolutely no mention of mental health measures

Wikipedia Aurora Colorado Theatre Massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora,_Colorado_theater_shooting)
-Section dedicated to gun politics, no mention of mental health measures

[Yodamaster]

Ok so if normal people collect things like shoes or model toys, who collects killing instruments? Not model guns or replicas mind you, actual guns that kill people (like herself for instance)
Posted via RS Mobile

People who enjoy target shooting? People who are interested in the history surrounding firearms?

You really need to stop making it seem like gun owners are nuts for having a hobby. Firearms are pieces of metal, plastic, and wood, what makes the owner a nut is how he chooses to use one.


We don't need any of the fancy cars out there, most are deemed to be too fast for the street, yet thousands of people are interested in collecting mobile hunks of steel that weigh thousands of pounds and can be driven at speeds exceeding 100 miles per hour.

It's all in how you use it, and where. There have been plenty of fatal incidents involving vehicles, hit and runs, drunk driving, you name it. None of those incidents mean that owning a car makes you less mentally stable. Sure, guns may have been invented to kill, but there's more to them than death and destruction nowadays.


Notice how licensing and regulations do not stop people from using vehicles to kill others, whether it's an accident or not.

[MindBomber]

Any fight will be determined by three factors: mindset, training, and tools. You must have the mindset that you will stop the threat regardless of harm to yourself and you will not back down. The principal and several teachers in this incident showed they had this proper mindset. Mindset is the only part of the three that cannot be given or learned.

For educators that have the right mindset, all they need is the training and tools. They can be trained to use weapons to defend themselves and students. Believe it or not, if educators were given one week and then 2 days per year afterwards of firearms and active shooter training, they would be more trained than half the Law Enforcement officers in North America.


I've already responded to your thoughts on teachers training for urban combat scenarios part-time, and you've not said anything that even attempts to dispel any of my prior responses in this passage.

I'm not sure how to respond to this, short of re-iterating the point from my prior response: the psychological profile associated with a person capable of spontaneously responding to an act, is not comparable to a person capable of arranging and training for a pre-planned response to an act. The qualities that makes a person a good kindergarten teacher are juxtaposed to those that make a person a good police officer.


Israel HAS prevented attacks from occuring. Since the Ma'alot Massacre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma'alot_massacre) in 1974 which followed many other terrorist shootings at schools, Israel has armed civilians at many school grounds. Since then, terrorist gunman attacking Israeli schools has been virtually non-existent. One 2002 incident involved no students harmed, and the armed civilians killing a terrorist gunman.


I'll give you that Israel's approach of protecting schools might be effective, but the issue in the Middle East is complicated and I'm not familiar enough with it to carry on much further. I return to my basic point, because Israel cannot control access to the weapons used to attack its people the attacks will continually occur. In Israel, if the attacks are not executed by gunman they will be car bombs, if not executed by car bombs they will be by missiles, the enemies attack will perpetually attack the weakest target and civilians continue to die. Americas terrorists are fundamentally different in that they arise internally, so a different approach is needed.


Agreed. So it comes down to two different solutions to a problem with many favouring one. Yet that one solution doesn't prevent the problem, it only attempts to deal with the means to commit a tragedy.

I think it was posted earlier in this thread: society has no problems blaming a tool or machine because it cannot be personified and has no logic or reason of its own. Society cannot blame the person because that would mean society failed him.

Guns are designed to enable humans to easily kill humans.

Guns used for hunting enable humans to easily kill non-human animals, not much of a difference there though.

Guns used for target shooting substitute paper for humans or non-human animals, but often the targets are images of humans.

Trucks are designed to enable humans to easily transport objects.

Knives are designed to enable humans to easily cut vegetables, boxes, and such.

A person can commit mass assault or murder with a truck, and there will be no calls to restrict access to them.

A person can commit mass assault or murder with a knife, and there will be no calls to restrict access to them.

If a person commits assault or murder with a firearm, there will be an instant response to restrict access to them.

Why?

A person who commits mass assault or murder with a truck or knife is grossly manipulating the intent of its design.

A person who commits mass assault or murder with a firearm is using it for the purpose it was designed.

I do find the earlier idea interesting, and there's some truth in it.

It's not completely unjustified that some fault is given to firearms though, they're fufilling the purpose of their design.

There needs to be a better system for catching the people before they fall so low. It is a very difficult proposal to catch all those people, and restricting the access of those who slip through the cracks to have to firearms effectively limits the harm they can do.


I agree. I was hoping that posting these diagrams would lead to a dialogue, especially the American CCW and homicide statistics. I would like to know what evidence everyone has of other changes from 1991 to 2010 that could lead to the homicide rate dropping.

That's the right thing to wonder. I urge you to now counter those diagrams, especially the American one since this is about American shootings. Especially interesting is that the scope (1991-2010) encompasses the entire American Assault Weapons Ban, from 1994-2004, yet in 2010 homicides are still below 1991 levels.

I find this very relevant because all these shooting incidents are happening around the time Obama is talking about renewing the Assault Weapons Ban. Is the Assault Weapons Ban effective at preventing these incidents? (aside: the Columbine shooting occured in 1999 while the Assault Weapons Ban was still in place). Is it a "feel good" law that gives people a false sense of security without addressing the root issue?

Here's an article that attributes the decline to a number of possibilities: policing strategies, sentencing strategies, the state of the economy, the decline in cocaine use, and... iron levels in the blood of children.
Why Crime Keeps Falling - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304066504576345553135009870.html)

It's all in how you use it, and where. There have been plenty of fatal incidents involving vehicles, hit and runs, drunk driving, you name it. None of those incidents mean that owning a car makes you less mentally stable. Sure, guns may have been invented to kill, but there's more to them than death and destruction nowadays.


Notice how licensing and regulations do not stop people from using vehicles to kill others, whether it's an accident or not.

Read my babbling above, I think it's relevant to what you've said here.

[SkinnyPupp]

People who enjoy target shooting? People who are interested in the history surrounding firearms?

You really need to stop making it seem like gun owners are nuts for having a hobby. Firearms are pieces of metal, plastic, and wood, what makes the owner a nut is how he chooses to use one.

Actually I am interested in firearms myself, especially the history. I enjoy reading and learning about guns, the companies behind them, etc.

But I don't keep loaded guns around, not just because it would be a pain in the ass to do so, but because it is stupid and pointless.

When I want to go shooting, I run hit up the gun range in Washington. They have all these guns to choose from, in a controlled environment, where guns belong - on the shooting range. Not in your fucking closet. There is no good reason to keep guns and ammo in your home, even if you're a huge gun buff. Collect the guns, take it to the range to shoot, but why do you need ammo right there with the gun? There is literally nothing good that can come from it.

[DanHibiki]

People who enjoy target shooting? People who are interested in the history surrounding firearms?

You really need to stop making it seem like gun owners are nuts for having a hobby. Firearms are pieces of metal, plastic, and wood, what makes the owner a nut is how he chooses to use one.


We don't need any of the fancy cars out there, most are deemed to be too fast for the street, yet thousands of people are interested in collecting mobile hunks of steel that weigh thousands of pounds and can be driven at speeds exceeding 100 miles per hour.

It's all in how you use it, and where. There have been plenty of fatal incidents involving vehicles, hit and runs, drunk driving, you name it. None of those incidents mean that owning a car makes you less mentally stable. Sure, guns may have been invented to kill, but there's more to them than death and destruction nowadays.


Notice how licensing and regulations do not stop people from using vehicles to kill others, whether it's an accident or not.

But the purpose of a car is transportation. It was never designed with the idea it could kill someone. Sure it could kill and has but it's a trade off we make because the benefits out weigh the risk. Fire could kill too but it serves a even bigger purpose in life.

Guns were designed to kill and nothing more. It's a hobby for many but I don't see the benefits of allowing people to carry weapons to outweigh the cost.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Valour]

We don't need Jesus, We need Magneto so that we can collect all the guns together and keep one for himself so that he can rule America!

Arguing about Gun control is like saying We need AIDS control cuz AIDS is bad. No shit, I think we all know that.

But its too late, you can't convince half of America to give up all their guns. The genie is out the bag. So I guess they just have to accept that innocents will die every year because of this necessity to be armed in case the US government turns on its own people cough Patriot Act cough

[jlo mein]

I've already responded to your thoughts on teachers training for urban combat scenarios part-time, and you've not said anything that even attempts to dispel any of my prior responses in this passage.

I'm not sure how to respond to this, short of re-iterating the point from my prior response

I believed I did, but I guess we've reached a stagnant point in this debate. My main point on educators remains that many actively tried to stop the shooter bare handed. They are not cowards.



I'll give you that Israel's approach of protecting schools might be effective, but the issue in the Middle East is complicated and I'm not familiar enough with it to carry on much further. I return to my basic point, because Israel cannot control access to the weapons used to attack its people the attacks will continually occur. In Israel, if the attacks are not executed by gunman they will be car bombs, if not executed by car bombs they will be by missiles, the enemies attack will perpetually attack the weakest target and civilians continue to die. Americas terrorists are fundamentally different in that they arise internally, so a different approach is needed.

I admire you pointing out the flaws in this comparison, because it leads me into another argument: method of attack. You mention if guns are not used, attacks will come via other means.

While attacks on Israel and America are different, the same logic of method used applies. If not guns, home made bombs, knives, etc. Controlling guns is society avoiding the base issue which is mentally ill people are being ignored in America to the point where they justify themselves making these attacks.

You made a previous argument that making bombs is difficult to learn or do for the average person. The Aurora theatre shooter booby trapped his apartment with home made bombs. If you take away one method, psychopaths will find another.

2012 Aurora shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Aurora_shooting#Explosive_devices)


There needs to be a better system for catching the people before they fall so low. It is a very difficult proposal to catch all those people, and restricting the access of those who slip through the cracks to have to firearms effectively limits the harm they can do.

I'm glad we're starting to agree on some points here. I believe society and media puts a disproportionate amount of lobbying and effort into gun control versus mental health. As in one of my previous posts, in the aftermath of several high profile shootings (Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora movie theatre), much discussion took place on gun control and virtually none on mental wellness. Perhaps a combination of the two is going to be the most effective solution, but I believe little progress will be made while almost 100% of the effort is on gun control.


Here's an article that attributes the decline to a number of possibilities: policing strategies, sentencing strategies, the state of the economy, the decline in cocaine use, and... iron levels in the blood of children.
Why Crime Keeps Falling - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304066504576345553135009870.html)

This article makes no mention of homicide, not even generally about violent crimes, and instead focuses on property/monetary crimes. While listing off a long list of possible reasons for decline in property crime, even far fetched ideas as heavy metals in the bloodstream, it doesn't once mention armed citizens. In his studies this author must have encountered that argument at least once, which makes me believe he has a bias on the issue.

I would still love to be presented with an article dispelling causation between increasing armed citizens and decreasing homicide rates.

[Yodamaster]

Actually I am interested in firearms myself, especially the history. I enjoy reading and learning about guns, the companies behind them, etc.

But I don't keep loaded guns around, not just because it would be a pain in the ass to do so, but because it is stupid and pointless.

When I want to go shooting, I run hit up the gun range in Washington. They have all these guns to choose from, in a controlled environment, where guns belong - on the shooting range. Not in your fucking closet. There is no good reason to keep guns and ammo in your home, even if you're a huge gun buff. Collect the guns, take it to the range to shoot, but why do you need ammo right there with the gun? There is literally nothing good that can come from it.


Your original remark was that simply owning multiple firearms meant that you must have some sort of mental problem. You didn't add the part about ammo or having the guns actually loaded until now.

There is no reason for a gun to be loaded if you only intend to use it at a range, I'm not disputing that, because I already agree.

The only part I have a problem with, is the ammo arguement. Anybody that has owned a firearm, knows that you have to experiment with yours to find what ammo is best for it. A gun range is not guaranteed to have the spec of ammo your firearm operates safely with.

But even then, your ammo and weaponry are supposed to be separated in a locked container, in a safe.


My parents are strongly against having guns in the apartment, but we've come to the agreement that they would be safe enough at our shop (in an industrial area).

[Harvey Specter]

I really hate to say this but I highly doubt you'll see any new gun laws even after this massacre. The gun lobby is too powerful and way too many elected officials are linked to the NRA and other lobby groups, they would never vote for laws that would ban or restrict guns because it risks losing elections.

[SkinnyPupp]

Your original remark was that simply owning multiple firearms meant that you must have some sort of mental problem. You didn't add the part about ammo or having the guns actually loaded until now.

There is no reason for a gun to be loaded if you only intend to use it at a range, I'm not disputing that, because I already agree.

The only part I have a problem with, is the ammo arguement. Anybody that has owned a firearm, knows that you have to experiment with yours to find what ammo is best for it. A gun range is not guaranteed to have the spec of ammo your firearm operates safely with.

But even then, your ammo and weaponry are supposed to be separated in a locked container, in a safe.


My parents are strongly against having guns in the apartment, but we've come to the agreement that they would be safe enough at our shop (in an industrial area).
Yes, I suppose I should have made that clear. I have nothing against guns or owning guns as a hobby. My main point is that to live in a safe, quiet community, and think you need several loaded guns with ammo, especially weapons that are specifically made for self defense, there is something going on in your head that makes you think unclearly. Whether it's a mental issue like insanity, or just straight up paranoia, I couldn't say.

To me, the main thing is that nothing good can come from that situation. Only bad.

[Lomac]

There's an inherent flaw in comparing gun ownership to owning multiple vehicles. As has already been stated, vehicles were built with a vastly different purpose in mind when compared to a firearm. Yes, a car can be used to drive through a crowd full of people, but that doesn't mean it was built for the purpose. Virtually anything laying around you can be used as a weapon. Sure, most would be pretty useless, but some can be quite deadly.

If anything, compare firearms to a bow and arrow, or even a crossbow. The latter two have been long since phased out as old technology, yet people still go to an archery range and fire off some arrows. Hell, I know someone who still hunts with one. They were bred for the same purpose as firearms: to hunt and kill. Doesn't stop it from being fun to play around with, though.

Actually I am interested in firearms myself, especially the history. I enjoy reading and learning about guns, the companies behind them, etc.

But I don't keep loaded guns around, not just because it would be a pain in the ass to do so, but because it is stupid and pointless.

When I want to go shooting, I run hit up the gun range in Washington. They have all these guns to choose from, in a controlled environment, where guns belong - on the shooting range. Not in your fucking closet. There is no good reason to keep guns and ammo in your home, even if you're a huge gun buff. Collect the guns, take it to the range to shoot, but why do you need ammo right there with the gun? There is literally nothing good that can come from it.

While I'm not a firearm owner, I know many people who are. I used to go to DVC many, many times. I still go into the bush (usually out in Mission, at "Little Iraq") with my friends and shoot of a bunch of rounds. Every one we meet up there are also responsible and make sure there's no issues with cross shooting. Police also love to patrol that area, so that's an even bigger incentive to make sure everything is going by the book.

Shooting at a range can be fun, especially if you're looking to fire off a gun you don't own, but there are often restrictions. Typically, indoor ranges don't allow center fire rifles and limit the calibre you can use. Many outdoor ranges are the same as well.

To address the fact that no one needs to own a gun in their house... to a certain degree I agree. If you live in a Yaletown condo or reside in a random suburb of the GVRD, that's more or less true. There's no "real reason" why you need to have a firearm locked up in your place of residence. The laws are clearly not on the defendants side if a burglar breaks in and you shoot him. That's been made clear multiple times in the past. However, for many people who live outside of the GVRD (or any major metropolis in Canada), a rifle is often a necessity. My best friend lives in the middle of butt fuck nowhere land, on property that often sees many top-chain animals of prey roaming through it on any given week. Add to that fact that she has two young daughters to watch out for, and a rifle suddenly becomes an attractive proposition. And keep in mind she only has twenty acres to contend with. Many of her neighbours and family friends have multiple hectres of land to look after. Their crops and livestock are constantly under watch by wolves, coyotes, bears and other animals. For people like these, a firearm is simply part of their tools: typically not needed, but glad it's there for when it is.

To touch again on your main point, however, I think restricting guns to only ranges is the wrong step. In Canada, guns and ammo have to be locked up separately from one another. Most owners I know also either take out the firing pin or put a trigger lock on when they know it wont be used for a while. Responsible gun owners such as these are the ones that suffer when the government pulls it's knee jerk reaction. No, it's not "hard" to get your PAL, but it's a long enough process that it would deter the typical hot-headed person from deciding to get a gun and shooting up a populated area. Again, you say that there's no "real reason" to own a gun, but what about responsible hobbyists? A guy I know collects pre-WW2 prohibited handguns. Many aren't in working condition anymore, but some are. These guns are as much interest to a firearms historian as an old 1930's Bolex H-16 film camera is to me.

I would never spout the Second Amendment as a valid reason for gun ownership. Instead, I would say that through proper background checks and formal, government approved methods of training, gun ownership should be open to all who pass. Banning firearms entirely will never solve mass murders and it only ends up affecting those who are responsible.

That is, of course, simply based on ownership. Tackling mental health issues is another thing entirely and one I wont bother going into.

[MindBomber]

I believed I did, but I guess we've reached a stagnant point in this debate. My main point on educators remains that many actively tried to stop the shooter bare handed. They are not cowards.

I might not be presenting my point clearly, it's been a very long week.

I do not think that teachers are cowards, not at all.


I admire you pointing out the flaws in this comparison, because it leads me into another argument: method of attack. You mention if guns are not used, attacks will come via other means.

While attacks on Israel and America are different, the same logic of method used applies. If not guns, home made bombs, knives, etc. Controlling guns is society avoiding the base issue which is mentally ill people are being ignored in America to the point where they justify themselves making these attacks.

You made a previous argument that making bombs is difficult to learn or do for the average person. The Aurora theatre shooter booby trapped his apartment with home made bombs. If you take away one method, psychopaths will find another.

2012 Aurora shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Aurora_shooting#Explosive_devices)

I'm glad we're starting to agree on some points here. I believe society and media puts a disproportionate amount of lobbying and effort into gun control versus mental health. As in one of my previous posts, in the aftermath of several high profile shootings (Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora movie theatre), much discussion took place on gun control and virtually none on mental wellness. Perhaps a combination of the two is going to be the most effective solution, but I believe little progress will be made while almost 100% of the effort is on gun control.


It is impossible to prevent a person set on murder from committing it if they can freely move within the general public.

If I chose, I could go to a hardware store and find a dozen instruments to kill in as many minutes.

Whether I find a hammer, axe, chainsaw, nail gun, or knife at the hardware store, none of those items would be anywhere near as capable as a firearm, and that's the whole point. Firearms are very good at what they've be designed to do; they're so good at it they've changed the outcome of wars, and revolutionized society.

I do not dispute, controlling firearms is a pathetic alternative to catching mentally ill people before they reach such a low level. I don't think it's possible for society to catch all mentally ill people though, no matter how much effort is applied to the task. Humans, are, humans, we're very flawed and limited in our abilities. The US army officer who went on a killing spree at Fort Hood, BTK serial killer, and Canadian army pilot serial killer, are very good examples of just how difficult it is to catch everyone.

If we accept that it's simply not possible to kill everyone, restricting access to firearms can limit the damage they're capable of doing.

One minor correction - I didn't say an IED was difficult for an average person to build, only that is more difficult than legally purchasing a gun.


This article makes no mention of homicide, not even generally about violent crimes, and instead focuses on property/monetary crimes. While listing off a long list of possible reasons for decline in property crime, even far fetched ideas as heavy metals in the bloodstream, it doesn't once mention armed citizens. In his studies this author must have encountered that argument at least once, which makes me believe he has a bias on the issue.

I would still love to be presented with an article dispelling causation between increasing armed citizens and decreasing homicide rates.

It's difficult to find an article dispelling causation between an increase in armed citizens and decreasing homicide rates, because if you enter those search words into Google you will receive dozens of fanatically pro-gun American pages offering conclusions based on questionable evidence. I would concede if those pages offered very good evidence, but they don't, and they're written by the type of people who support private citizen armies (ad hominem, I know).

Here's another article, it focuses more on violent crime, but applies the same basic reasoning:


HIGH-SPEED car chases, shoot-outs, dealing with politicians: life for a Los Angeles police officer can be trying. Yet for sheer stress little can compete with the ordeal of the Compstat meeting. Every seven weeks bureau commanders are grilled by a senior panel, often including the police chief himself, on the whys and wherefores of crime in their jurisdictions. They are expected to have an on-the-spot grasp of the statistics: if there has been a spike in burglaries from vehicles, the captain’s interrogators will want to know what is being done about it. There is no hiding from the numbers: data-laden documents are distributed before the meeting, and overhead map projections pinpoint the sites of individual incidents in pitiless detail. The pressure has reduced officers to tears.

Although some think Compstat introduces incentives for police to fiddle the figures (or “juke the stats”), most analysts agree that it has improved the effectiveness and efficiency of the police in Los Angeles, and other cities with similar systems. (Compstat was brought to Los Angeles from New York by Bill Bratton, a tough-talking police chief who oversaw declines in crime in both cities.) It helps in two ways. First, by mandating the collection and management of detailed crime data it makes it easier to allocate police resources. Second, it introduces accountability of the strictest sort. If you are not reducing crime in your bureau, it doesn’t matter if your children play baseball with the mayor’s: you can forget about that promotion.

Crime in America has plummeted since its numerical peak in 1992; the violent sort by 38%, according to FBI statistics. To what extent can innovations in policing like Compstat explain the decline? Naturally, police departments and politicians take much of the credit. In July Charlie Beck, chief of the LAPD, said that new crime figures showed Los Angeles to be the “safest big city” in the country (though only three other cities matched his definition of “big”: New York, Chicago and Houston). The mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, boasts that the city is safer than at any time since 1952. Both agree that the police have been doing a fine job.

Driving one evening through Watts, a poor part of South Los Angeles with a troubled past, Sergeant Steve Lurie explains that his colleagues find they are called on to be social workers, child psychologists and marriage-guidance counsellors as often as they are police officers. He knows the projects, the gangs and the problems. He describes the challenges of “hood days”: on dates that correspond to numbered streets (eg, October 3rd for 103rd Street), the gang within whose territory the street falls holds a big party. Often this means nothing more than food, drink and music. But sometimes the gangbangers take the opportunity to go on a murderous shooting spree on neighbouring turf.

At around 10pm Mr Lurie is called to the site of a suspected burglary. There is a hint of danger in the air when police eject an entire family from their home after they think they spot the suspect hiding inside. Neighbours, many of them small children, spill on to the streets to see what is going on. But Mr Lurie and his team delicately reduce the temperature, separating the aggressive men from the rest of the crowd. These are hardly the experiences most parents would want for their children on a Monday evening. Yet residents seem by and large to see the police as arbiters and protectors, and Watts bears little resemblance to the crime-ridden hellhole of 20 years ago. Mr Lurie says he wouldn’t be surprised if this year there were as many murders in all of Los Angeles as there were in his division in 1992.

Yet good policing is not the only factor behind the decline in crime. The fall in violent crime in Los Angeles began in 1992, a decade before the introduction of Compstat, and a time when the LAPD was hated by many residents, particularly blacks and Latinos. The truth is that no one predicted America’s great crime decline, and no one has a definitive explanation for it. Particularly confounding has been an acceleration in the drop since 2008; many observers thought a poorer country would be a less law-abiding one.

Everything from the removal of lead from petrol to the increased prescription of psychiatric drugs has been credited with the decline. A controversial theory proposed in 2001 by two academics, Steven Levitt (of “Freakonomics” fame) and John Donohue, which attributed half the previous decade’s drop in crime to the legalisation of abortion in the 1970s, still has fans. Today there is growing interest in the role of video games and social-media technologies in providing young men, who are responsible for the lion’s share of violent crimes, with alternative ways to spend their time.

Other analysts look to structural or demographic explanations. Jack Levin, a criminology professor at Northeastern University in Boston, acknowledges the success of policing strategies, but notes that an ageing society like the United States should expect to experience less violent crime. Immigration also matters, he says: studies have repeatedly shown that cities with large immigrant populations experience lower rates of violent crime.

Then there is the awkward issue of incarceration. America continues to lock up a scandalously large number of its people: around 1% of the adult population is behind bars at any time. But, says Mr Levin, “the relationship between the incarceration rate and the violent-crime rate is not very strong.” New York has not followed the national mania for imprisonment, and yet the decline in its crime has been among the most impressive. Indeed, in states with a particular fondness for imprisoning citizens, such as California, the policy may have done more harm than good. Jonathan Simon, a law professor at Berkeley, points out that removing young men from their communities for long stretches erodes the social links—an older relative, say—that might otherwise help prod them out of crime. Today, under a controversial policy known as “realignment” forced on California by the Supreme Court, the crowds of inmates in the state’s prisons have at last begun to thin out.

Brusque encounters

An emerging challenge for police in some cities is that tactics that prove effective in the short term may also lose them trust. Their widely used “stop-and frisk” powers in New York City, for example, may have taken thousands of guns off the street, but they have also led to furious allegations of racial profiling. “We’ve figured out that encounters with young people reduce violence, but they also have negative effects,” says Mr Simon. “Let’s see if we can separate the two.” A growing number of police are being killed on duty.

Moreover, the good news hardly extends to every corner of the country. Violent crime remains extremely high in some troubled cities, such as Memphis and Detroit, and in smaller places such as Oakland, California, and Camden, New Jersey. Most striking is an unexpected spike of gang-related violence in Chicago, where murders are up by 28% so far this year. Against a backdrop of a long-term decline in all crime in the city, as well as a 10% decline for the year, the sudden unrest has caused some alarm.

The real challenge will come when crime rates bottom out nationally, as one day they will. Compstat may have given some police officers sleepless nights, but in a broad environment of falling crime there is more credit than blame to go around. When the crime rate starts to rise, Compstat meetings will become that much harsher.

Everything it points out sounds more plausible than guns detering crime, except maybe the lead thing. If guns do deter crime, how could America have such high crime rates, despite having so many guns compared to other areas of the world?

[nabs]

Think we all need to stop with the political stuff. Yeah it has great value in what you guys are saying. But just think of the children and the other victims, and pray for their families.

[SkinnyPupp]

I really hate to say this but I highly doubt you'll see any new gun laws even after this massacre. The gun lobby is too powerful and way too many elected officials are linked to the NRA and other lobby groups, they would never vote for laws that would ban or restrict guns because it risks losing elections.
As much as I think owning a loaded gun at home and/or carrying one around is stupid, I also don't agree with banning them. The government controlling people that much is never a good thing, especially when the government is as inept as the one in America.

Take a look at the article I posted a while back about Japan. They have super strict gun control - and it is working. However look at the rights the people had to give up to do it. It might work there, maybe because that's just the way it's always been. But for the government to straight up ban guns goes directly against why they were allowed to carry them in the first place.

It's really tricky... I hate the government - especially federal - telling people what they can and can't do.

Something does need to happen though, maybe something along the lines of banning the ability to have guns and ammo in the same place, or something like that.

[SkinnyPupp]

Think we all need to stop with the political stuff. Yeah it has great value in what you guys are saying. But just think of the children and the other victims, and pray for their families.
And then what? Wait until the next attack?

[DanHibiki]

Think we all need to stop with the political stuff. Yeah it has great value in what you guys are saying. But just think of the children and the other victims, and pray for their families.

I think it's because we are all thinking of the children and victims that we're having this debate.

We're all heartbroken and angry and want something done that can lessen the chance of this happening again.

[rsx]

I lay the blame on the parent(s). Not the guns. There are too many irresponsible parents out there. Violence or drug/alcohol abuse stems from poor parenting. If the kid does have mental health issues, a stupid prepper mother shouldn't be buying guns and ammo and storing it in the house.

Personally, I think if any minor commits a crime, the parents should be held as accountable and be laid with the same charges. It's like have a potentially vicious dog loose in the neighborhood - the owner in the end is held responsible.

[Harvey Specter]

I was just watching Fox News and CNN and it's refreshing to see them finally talking about the other major issue in America that is directly linked to mass shootings which is mental health and the collapsing mental health industry. The indusry has been in decline because insurance companies are finding ways not to pay for issues related to mental health. It's the same problem up here; prefect example is the story about that guy last week that almost killed those 3 elderly women in DT. He went to St. Paul's a few days before the attack asking for help and he was turned away, the mentally ill have nowhere to turn.

And I can't stand people who say "I have a friend who has mental issues but he/she would never kill innocent children", news flash: not all mental illness is the same, it affects people differently and needs to be diagnosed individually.

[CharlesInCharge]

The TRUE SOURCE of RANDOM & MASS SHOOTINGS and VIOLENCE
The TRUE SOURCE of RANDOM & MASS SHOOTINGS and VIOLENCE - YouTube
Video description
... is crusading to STOP mandatory mental screening and forced drugging of our children. This video highlights the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence, including nearly all recent mass-shootings and school shootings.
Discover more truth about Psychiatry's evil reign as the true shadow governments that have a chokehold on all sectors of society


With all the sadistic and degenerate media that is shown on our TV's and movies, couple that with the drugs and poverty rates in the U.S. ... you'd be stupid not to have arms in your home. Whether its for the fear of a night time attacker, day time house invasion, or another bank schemed depression causing nation wide chaos... making it known you have a weapon when there's intruders could save ones life or from you and your family being raped.

If suspects and deranged persons know citizens are armed, they would think twice about doing such crime and would only have the upper hand against weak defenseless individuals.
Same with the political situation, intellectuals knew elites will eventually encroach on America, citizens having guns is one layer of protection in keeping some sort of sovereignty.

[Jason00S2000]

Right, because the people with a mental disposition appropriate for educating elementary students are often equally suited to a role as a close-quarters urban combat soldier.


Best post in this thread.

[LiquidTurbo]

http://i.imgur.com/wk0QV.jpg

[Noir]

A good look at what's its like to parent someone with mental illness; a parent who's someday worried that she may be raising her own Dylan Klebold or Eric Harris but doesn't have the heart to send him to jail.

This article really focuses on the problem of dealing with mental illness rather than gun control.

The Anarchist Soccer Mom (http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.ca/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html)


In the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.

Three days before 20 year-old Adam Lanza killed his mother, then opened fire on a classroom full of Connecticut kindergartners, my 13-year old son Michael (name changed) missed his bus because he was wearing the wrong color pants.

“I can wear these pants,” he said, his tone increasingly belligerent, the black-hole pupils of his eyes swallowing the blue irises.

“They are navy blue,” I told him. “Your school’s dress code says black or khaki pants only.”

“They told me I could wear these,” he insisted. “You’re a stupid bitch. I can wear whatever pants I want to. This is America. I have rights!”

“You can’t wear whatever pants you want to,” I said, my tone affable, reasonable. “And you definitely cannot call me a stupid bitch. You’re grounded from electronics for the rest of the day. Now get in the car, and I will take you to school.”

I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

A few weeks ago, Michael pulled a knife and threatened to kill me and then himself after I asked him to return his overdue library books. His 7 and 9 year old siblings knew the safety plan—they ran to the car and locked the doors before I even asked them to. I managed to get the knife from Michael, then methodically collected all the sharp objects in the house into a single Tupperware container that now travels with me. Through it all, he continued to scream insults at me and threaten to kill or hurt me.

That conflict ended with three burly police officers and a paramedic wrestling my son onto a gurney for an expensive ambulance ride to the local emergency room. The mental hospital didn’t have any beds that day, and Michael calmed down nicely in the ER, so they sent us home with a prescription for Zyprexa and a follow-up visit with a local pediatric psychiatrist.

We still don’t know what’s wrong with Michael. Autism spectrum, ADHD, Oppositional Defiant or Intermittent Explosive Disorder have all been tossed around at various meetings with probation officers and social workers and counselors and teachers and school administrators. He’s been on a slew of antipsychotic and mood altering pharmaceuticals, a Russian novel of behavioral plans. Nothing seems to work.

At the start of seventh grade, Michael was accepted to an accelerated program for highly gifted math and science students. His IQ is off the charts. When he’s in a good mood, he will gladly bend your ear on subjects ranging from Greek mythology to the differences between Einsteinian and Newtonian physics to Doctor Who. He’s in a good mood most of the time. But when he’s not, watch out. And it’s impossible to predict what will set him off.

Several weeks into his new junior high school, Michael began exhibiting increasingly odd and threatening behaviors at school. We decided to transfer him to the district’s most restrictive behavioral program, a contained school environment where children who can’t function in normal classrooms can access their right to free public babysitting from 7:30-1:50 Monday through Friday until they turn 18.

The morning of the pants incident, Michael continued to argue with me on the drive. He would occasionally apologize and seem remorseful. Right before we turned into his school parking lot, he said, “Look, Mom, I’m really sorry. Can I have video games back today?”

“No way,” I told him. “You cannot act the way you acted this morning and think you can get your electronic privileges back that quickly.”

His face turned cold, and his eyes were full of calculated rage. “Then I’m going to kill myself,” he said. “I’m going to jump out of this car right now and kill myself.”

That was it. After the knife incident, I told him that if he ever said those words again, I would take him straight to the mental hospital, no ifs, ands, or buts. I did not respond, except to pull the car into the opposite lane, turning left instead of right.

“Where are you taking me?” he said, suddenly worried. “Where are we going?”

“You know where we are going,” I replied.

“No! You can’t do that to me! You’re sending me to hell! You’re sending me straight to hell!”

I pulled up in front of the hospital, frantically waiving for one of the clinicians who happened to be standing outside. “Call the police,” I said. “Hurry.”

Michael was in a full-blown fit by then, screaming and hitting. I hugged him close so he couldn’t escape from the car. He bit me several times and repeatedly jabbed his elbows into my rib cage. I’m still stronger than he is, but I won’t be for much longer.

The police came quickly and carried my son screaming and kicking into the bowels of the hospital. I started to shake, and tears filled my eyes as I filled out the paperwork—“Were there any difficulties with....at what age did your child....were there any problems with...has your child ever experienced...does your child have....”

At least we have health insurance now. I recently accepted a position with a local college, giving up my freelance career because when you have a kid like this, you need benefits. You’ll do anything for benefits. No individual insurance plan will cover this kind of thing.

For days, my son insisted that I was lying—that I made the whole thing up so that I could get rid of him. The first day, when I called to check up on him, he said, “I hate you. And I’m going to get my revenge as soon as I get out of here.”

By day three, he was my calm, sweet boy again, all apologies and promises to get better. I’ve heard those promises for years. I don’t believe them anymore.

On the intake form, under the question, “What are your expectations for treatment?” I wrote, “I need help.”

And I do. This problem is too big for me to handle on my own. Sometimes there are no good options. So you just pray for grace and trust that in hindsight, it will all make sense.

I am sharing this story because I am Adam Lanza’s mother. I am Dylan Klebold’s and Eric Harris’s mother. I am Jason Holmes’s mother. I am Jared Loughner’s mother. I am Seung-Hui Cho’s mother. And these boys—and their mothers—need help. In the wake of another horrific national tragedy, it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.

According to Mother Jones, since 1982, 61 mass murders involving firearms have occurred throughout the country. (A Guide to Mass Shootings in America | Mother Jones (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map)). Of these, 43 of the killers were white males, and only one was a woman. Mother Jones focused on whether the killers obtained their guns legally (most did). But this highly visible sign of mental illness should lead us to consider how many people in the U.S. live in fear, like I do.

When I asked my son’s social worker about my options, he said that the only thing I could do was to get Michael charged with a crime. “If he’s back in the system, they’ll create a paper trail,” he said. “That’s the only way you’re ever going to get anything done. No one will pay attention to you unless you’ve got charges.”

I don’t believe my son belongs in jail. The chaotic environment exacerbates Michael’s sensitivity to sensory stimuli and doesn’t deal with the underlying pathology. But it seems like the United States is using prison as the solution of choice for mentally ill people. According to Human Rights Watch, the number of mentally ill inmates in U.S. prisons quadrupled from 2000 to 2006, and it continues to rise—in fact, the rate of inmate mental illness is five times greater (56 percent) than in the non-incarcerated population. (U.S.: Number of Mentally Ill in Prisons Quadrupled | Human Rights Watch (http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/09/05/us-number-mentally-ill-prisons-quadrupled))

With state-run treatment centers and hospitals shuttered, prison is now the last resort for the mentally ill—Rikers Island, the LA County Jail, and Cook County Jail in Illinois housed the nation’s largest treatment centers in 2011 (Nation's Jails Struggle With Mentally Ill Prisoners : NPR (http://www.npr.org/2011/09/04/140167676/nations-jails-struggle-with-mentally-ill-prisoners))

No one wants to send a 13-year old genius who loves Harry Potter and his snuggle animal collection to jail. But our society, with its stigma on mental illness and its broken healthcare system, does not provide us with other options. Then another tortured soul shoots up a fast food restaurant. A mall. A kindergarten classroom. And we wring our hands and say, “Something must be done.”

I agree that something must be done. It’s time for a meaningful, nation-wide conversation about mental health. That’s the only way our nation can ever truly heal.

God help me. God help Michael. God help us all.

[Graeme S]

Charles, this is not the thread.

This is your single warning.

[iEatClams]

I was just watching Fox News and CNN and it's refreshing to see them finally talking about the other major issue in America that is directly linked to mass shootings which is mental health and the collapsing mental health industry. The indusry has been in decline because insurance companies are finding ways not to pay for issues related to mental health. It's the same problem up here; prefect example is the story about that guy last week that almost killed those 3 elderly women in DT. He went to St. Paul's a few days before the attack asking for help and he was turned away, the mentally ill have nowhere to turn.

And I can't stand people who say "I have a friend who has mental issues but he/she would never kill innocent children", news flash: not all mental illness is the same, it affects people differently and needs to be diagnosed individually.

this is true, mental health and even physically disabled people have less and less places to go to help nowadays.

[iEatClams]

Thanks for this statement, this really hit home for me:



Originally Posted by MindBomber
Right, because the people with a mental disposition appropriate for educating elementary students are often equally suited to a role as a close-quarters urban combat soldier.

[dinosaur]

I think the sad thing about mental illness is that there is too much focus on drugs rather than therapy.

Drugs are easy. Drugs are cheap. Drugs are everywhere. Numb the pain, Numb reality, Make them more conforming to society, and have people in a semi-conscious state towing the company line so they can pay for the drugs to make them numb.

You turn on the TV, open a magazine, and click on a website and all you see is an ad for this drug and an ad for that drug. Drug to take away depression, take away the anxiety, take away the panic, lessen the mania....oh, and if that ONE drug doesn't work, try combining it with another one....and another one. Before you know it, you are on some random 5 drug cocktail that would put a horse to sleep. But, its okay....you now appear to be 'normal'.

The unfortunate thing is that the side-effects for these drugs are often just as bad or ever worse than the actual mental health problem the individual is dealing with. Don't get me wrong, I think drug DO help some people and drugs CAN work great when in conjunction with therapeutic treatment. The problem is, it is easier to pop a pill in the privacy of your own home once a day than to call someone and make an appointment. Talking about it is hard. Whether you are telling your family you are seeking help or being honest with the therapist, there is a social stigma attached to what you are doing.

People judge, people think you are crazy, people think you are weak, and it makes people uncomfortable.

Mental health programs are always being cut or having their funding reduced or they are lumped together with substance abuse programs. Mental health problems doesn't always equate substance abuse. Normal people like you and me suffer from depression, anxiety, panic attacks, and other issues that effect our lives. We don't need more drugs...we need better outreach. We need to remove the social stigma that we are all 'crazy'. If it is okay to go to the doctor when you are physically ill, why is it harder to go to the doctor when you are mentally ill.

I am happy to see that the conversation about mental health in regards to this horrendous event is being discussed....but at the same time, I think it could do harm. Just because some of us suffers from a dip in our mental health does not mean we are going to act out like this.

\rant.

[Graeme S]

Not to defend any one position, but I think the point Jlomein is trying to make is not that teachers make good soldiers, but that teachers are selfless and will defend the lives of their charges quite literally to the death as we've seen here. I believe he's suggesting that arming these people would allow them to be better prepared to defend their charges, and hopefully not need it to be to the death.


Now, that having been said I'm personally opposed to having guns in schools. There've been stories of cops taking off their weapons to go to the washroom or leaving it in their car and usually nothing bad happens--but introducing more weapons into a school system is just asking for trouble.

[iwantaskyline]

Not to defend any one position, but I think the point Jlomein is trying to make is not that teachers make good soldiers, but that teachers are selfless and will defend the lives of their charges quite literally to the death as we've seen here. I believe he's suggesting that arming these people would allow them to be better prepared to defend their charges, and hopefully not need it to be to the death.


Now, that having been said I'm personally opposed to having guns in schools. There've been stories of cops taking off their weapons to go to the washroom or leaving it in their car and usually nothing bad happens--but introducing more weapons into a school system is just asking for trouble.

Agreed. Something more reasonable would be to just station a cop at each school..the costs justify children from being killed.

[Graeme S]

IIRC there was security screening measures there, and all the doors were locked. He forced his way in and past security. I doubt any cop who was stationed at any school would be on alert all the time--all it takes is just a moment of confusion or distraction and you can get shot.

Since the guy was the son of a substitute teacher at the school, if there was a cop, he may have looked at the kid and started to ask "How come you're here? Your mom isn't working today!" and gotten shot before he finished the question.



There are no easy answers here.

[iwantaskyline]

IIRC there was security screening measures there, and all the doors were locked. He forced his way in and past security. I doubt any cop who was stationed at any school would be on alert all the time--all it takes is just a moment of confusion or distraction and you can get shot.

Since the guy was the son of a substitute teacher at the school, if there was a cop, he may have looked at the kid and started to ask "How come you're here? Your mom isn't working today!" and gotten shot before he finished the question.



There are no easy answers here.

Was he not wearing military gear/bullet proof vest while holding a shit load of automatic guns? Quite sure a cop would have reacted to that...

[LiquidTurbo]

Friend posted this on FB.

Got a point.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/28761_492715830773836_884018591_n.jpg

[jlo mein]

It's difficult to find an article dispelling causation between an increase in armed citizens and decreasing homicide rates, because if you enter those search words into Google you will receive dozens of fanatically pro-gun American pages offering conclusions based on questionable evidence. I would concede if those pages offered very good evidence, but they don't, and they're written by the type of people who support private citizen armies (ad hominem, I know).


It is difficult to find isn't it? Because I have searched for it before myself and found many news articles (NOT pro-gun writers) that make every attempt to findany reason why homicide rates are dropping WITHOUT even mentioning an increase in legal armed citizens. They never mention it because they cannot find information relating increasing armed citizens leading to more homicide.

Once again I'd like to reiterate Mr. James Yeager's statistics not on homicide, but specifically active shooter situations. 50% of active shooters are stopped by intervention (the other 50% quit on their own regard or commit suicide without being confronted). 2/3's of the time a shooter is stopped by intervention, it is by a civilian, NOT a police officer.

Look at the Clackamas Town Center shooting article I posted. The Clackamas shooter entered the mall with a rifle, and killed two people before his rifle jammed and malfunctioned. When this happened he was confronted by a legally armed citizen who pulled a gun on him. The responsible citizen did not shoot because innocent people were behind the active shooter in the line of fire. However, when confronted, the active shooter ran away, and once he cleared his weapon, took his own life without killing anyone else. NONE of the national news media are reporting this, only the local Oregon news who are getting the real story. This relates back to my quote of the CNN executive who said they don't want to report on vigilante justice for fear of copycats. If they fear copycats, why do they report on mass murderers?

Piers Morgan didn't let John Lott get a word in edge wise, but Lott did manage to get one fundamental point across. In the Aurora, Colorado theatre shooting, there were six movie theatres close to the shooter's home. He didn't go to shoot people at the closest movie theatre. He chose the movie theatre that was specifically marked as a gun free zone, where he knew no one in the theatre would be armed. He wanted to shoot and murder defenseless citizens. As soonas he was confronted by armed police officers (arriving too late to save the long list of victims), he gave up and surrendered. He had no intention of resisting armed force, he only wanted to release carnage on defenseless people.

[68style]

For fuck's sake, who cares what studies say, the average jackass in society can't even park their car properly in a mall parking lot but you're advocating that average citizens needs to conceal carry........... I wouldn't trust most people I see walking around in public areas with a box of matches let alone the decision of when and where its appropriate to take the safety off on lethal force.

Leave gun carrying to the police.

[Excelsis]

shooting in connecticut - YouTube
Posted via RS Mobile

[Manic!]

It is difficult to find isn't it? Because I have searched for it before myself and found many news articles (NOT pro-gun writers) that make every attempt to findany reason why homicide rates are dropping WITHOUT even mentioning an increase in legal armed citizens. They never mention it because they cannot find information relating increasing armed citizens leading to more homicide.

Once again I'd like to reiterate Mr. James Yeager's statistics not on homicide, but specifically active shooter situations. 50% of active shooters are stopped by intervention (the other 50% quit on their own regard or commit suicide without being confronted). 2/3's of the time a shooter is stopped by intervention, it is by a civilian, NOT a police officer.

Look at the Clackamas Town Center shooting article I posted. The Clackamas shooter entered the mall with a rifle, and killed two people before his rifle jammed and malfunctioned. When this happened he was confronted by a legally armed citizen who pulled a gun on him. The responsible citizen did not shoot because innocent people were behind the active shooter in the line of fire. However, when confronted, the active shooter ran away, and once he cleared his weapon, took his own life without killing anyone else. NONE of the national news media are reporting this, only the local Oregon news who are getting the real story. This relates back to my quote of the CNN executive who said they don't want to report on vigilante justice for fear of copycats. If they fear copycats, why do they report on mass murderers?

Piers Morgan didn't let John Lott get a word in edge wise, but Lott did manage to get one fundamental point across. In the Aurora, Colorado theatre shooting, there were six movie theatres close to the shooter's home. He didn't go to shoot people at the closest movie theatre. He chose the movie theatre that was specifically marked as a gun free zone, where he knew no one in the theatre would be armed. He wanted to shoot and murder defenseless citizens. As soonas he was confronted by armed police officers (arriving too late to save the long list of victims), he gave up and surrendered. He had no intention of resisting armed force, he only wanted to release carnage on defenseless people.

Tacoma Mall shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Mall_shooting)

During the course of the shooting, Brendan (Dan) McKown, a legally armed citizen, intervened. McKown drew his 9mm CZ pistol and verbally commanded Maldonado to put down his gun. Maldonado's response was to fire on McKown, striking him once in the leg and four times in the torso, damaging McKown's spine and leaving him paralyzed. In addition to McKown, five other people were shot but not seriously injured, and a seventh person received a non-gunshot injury. At least one other person in the mall at the time also pulled a gun on Maldonado but did not fire for fear of hitting innocent bystanders.

Also Brendan McKown had regularly trained for these types of situations.

[MindBomber]

It is difficult to find isn't it? Because I have searched for it before myself and found many news articles (NOT pro-gun writers) that make every attempt to findany reason why homicide rates are dropping WITHOUT even mentioning an increase in legal armed citizens. They never mention it because they cannot find information relating increasing armed citizens leading to more homicide.


The bulk of scholars do not consider evidence presented by pro-gun research as compelling, they consider social factors with a broader reach to be the primary locus of changes in crime rates. Given that, it is reasonable that arming citizens would not be discussed. A biologist presenting data on evolution does not consider the points made by a creationist, and this situation is no different.

A good article, very impartial and ultimately leaning towards arming citizens being an entirely ineffective measure.

Guns--cause of crime or means for the innocent to protect themselves? It's one of those questions most voted likely to turn a pleasant discussion into a shouting match, but one that Duane Ruth-Heffelbower takes on in this Scholars Speak.

There’s a lot of discussion around the Fresno County Sheriff’s policy of freely granting concealed weapon permits to qualified citizens. The incident that triggered this discussion was the murder of a delivery truck driver who was shot while doing his early morning rounds.

Tragedies like this one always raise the question of what could have prevented them. Supporters of relaxed carry rules suggest that more armed citizens of good character could deter at least some of these crimes. Nationally others express the same thought, airline pilots included, so it is worth examining the research available to see if there is a correlation between more guns in the hands of good people and less violent crime.

In the interests of full disclosure, I grew up with guns and am a pretty good shot. As a Vietnam-era Air Force officer I qualified with a sidearm, putting 50 shots in an area the size of my fist. I have also worked around the world in places where order has broken down and have eaten dinner in hotels with people carrying automatic weapons.

One goal of research in this area of inquiry is to compare violent crime rates in areas with lots of guns and areas with few guns to see if there are differences. Brandon S. Centerwall did a study of homicide rates from 1976-80 in adjoining states and Canadian provinces. The provinces had one tenth as many handguns per capita as the states. Centerwall states: “No consistent differences were observed; criminal homicide rates were sometimes higher in the Canadian province, and sometimes higher in the adjoining US state.”

Mauser and Kates studied international data and summed up their study in 2006: “Our conclusion from the available data is that suicide, murder and violent crime rates are determined by basic social, economic and/or cultural factors with the availability of any particular one of the world’s myriad deadly instrument being irrelevant.”

Lott and Mustard examined a large data set of all U.S. counties and determined that easing carry laws to put more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens did decrease violent crime. These findings were widely celebrated and resulted in passage of carry laws in a number of states.

Ayres and Donohue examined Lott and Mustard’s data set and added in data from states where eased concealed weapons rules made firearms more common. Their conclusion published in the 2003 Stanford Law Review was: “We conclude that Lott and Mustard have made an important scholarly contribution in establishing that these laws have not led to the massive bloodbath of death and injury that some of their opponents feared. On the other hand, we find that the statistical evidence that these laws have reduced crime is limited, sporadic, and extraordinarily fragile.”

Scholars continue to study this issue, which has large implications for our society. At present there are studies that seem to show less crime where more citizens are armed, but these results do not hold up well to scrutiny. Those places that freely grant concealed weapons permits are the test beds where theories meet data. Fresno, with 10 percent of California’s concealed carry permits, is one of those test beds.

The practical question is whether or not the citizens of Fresno are better off being a test bed for the proposition that more armed citizens deter crime. Ayres and Donohue go on to state that: “While we do not want to overstate the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn from the extremely variable results emerging from the statistical analysis, if anything, there is stronger evidence for the conclusion that these laws increase crime than there is for the conclusion that they decrease it.”

Social experiments are a necessary part of governing any society. The only way to find out whether a theory works is to try it. The more data you have from places that have already tested the theory the better your decision whether or not to try it yourself. Where the test results are as equivocal as they are in the area of arming private citizens, how does one decide which path to follow? Scholars will be glad to receive the data from the Fresno experiment, but at present there is not enough good evidence that freely granting weapons carry permits reduces crime, while there is some evidence that it increases crime.


Do armed citizens deter crime? | FPU News (http://news.fresno.edu/01/12/2010/do-armed-citizens-deter-crime)

[trollface]

Friend posted this on FB.

Got a point.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/28761_492715830773836_884018591_n.jpg

Well, they did not change bomb regulations, too. Bombing ppl was and still and is ilegal. Same thing with guns and shooting people. Someone tell me about bomb regulation changes after the shoe bomber. Are bombs harder to buy now? Oh wait, you can't buy them.

[jlo mein]

For fuck's sake, who cares what studies say, the average jackass in society can't even park their car properly in a mall parking lot but you're advocating that average citizens needs to conceal carry........... I wouldn't trust most people I see walking around in public areas with a box of matches let alone the decision of when and where its appropriate to take the safety off on lethal force.

Leave gun carrying to the police.

To get a driver's licence, do you have to take a driver's skill course? Yes. However, do you have to go to classes on the liability issues of driving a car in public and running people over? Do you have to go to classes specifically outlining when it is justified to use your vehicle as a deadly weapon? Do you have to retrain and test annually on your driving ability and skill? Do you go through criminal and mental background checks to get a permit to drive?

I suggest you go read about the CCW permit process. I think you'll find it interesting how the right to bear arms is a constitutionally given right in America yet it can be a difficult and long process to get a CCW. Driving is not a right, it is a privilege, and yet it can be much easier to get a driver's licence in many states.

What's funny is that so many are against legally armed citizens with CCW permits, yet none of these high profile active shooters had CCW permits. CCW holders are the good guys that the national news media tries to surpress. Once again I reference the Clackamas Town Center incident, and there are many more I can list where CCW holders stopped a threat.

Everyone believes that pro-gun writers have an agenda and bias, which is true, but do you really believe the liberal national news media doesn't have one either? I'm not drinking the kool-aid from either camp, I'm only trying to find some truth in the center.

[jlo mein]

Tacoma Mall shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Mall_shooting)

Also Brendan McKown had regularly trained for these types of situations.

I want to thank you for posting this incident. I have read it many times before. Brendan McKown is a hero. He is a CCW holder who attempted to stop an active shooter.

A man entered Tacoma Mall with a rifle and began shooting people. McKown drew his legally carried handgun, confronted the active shooter, and verbally commanded him to cease his actions. McKown was shot several times and is now paralyzed for life. Another legal handgun carrier in the mall also drew his weapon and attempted to stop the active shooter, but he did not shoot due to innocent people being in the line of fire.

Do these two CCW holders sound like brash, act first-think later type men to anyone? McKown had the collected sense to verbally command the active shooter before taking any lethal action. The second CCW holder had the smarts to not fire when innocents are behind your target.

[bballguy]

I'm not drinking the kool-aid from either camp, I'm only trying to find some truth in the center.

http://www.mindwafers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/koolaid-man.gif

[jlo mein]

http://www.mindwafers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/koolaid-man.gif

You have a sick sense of humour. Remember that this thread is about a shooting massacre where 27 people were killed, many of which were children. Your disrespect for them has no place in this thread.

I've said my points and rebuttled many arguments from others here. It's become difficult to keep up with all the posts as most on RS seems to be in the liberal "guns are bad, there are no social problems at work here" camp. As a final reminder I urge everyone to read up on the issue as well as past similar events, finding information from both the left national media and the right pro-gun camps and find where the truth lies.

[Manic!]

I want to thank you for posting this incident. I have read it many times before. Brendan McKown is a hero. He is a CCW holder who attempted to stop an active shooter.

A man entered Tacoma Mall with a rifle and began shooting people. McKown drew his legally carried handgun, confronted the active shooter, and verbally commanded him to cease his actions. McKown was shot several times and is now paralyzed for life. Another legal handgun carrier in the mall also drew his weapon and attempted to stop the active shooter, but he did not shoot due to innocent people being in the line of fire.

Do these two CCW holders sound like brash, act first-think later type men to anyone? McKown had the collected sense to verbally command the active shooter before taking any lethal action. The second CCW holder had the smarts to not fire when innocents are behind your target.

A lot good carrying gun did. Carrying a gun did not save any lives it just ended up getting another person shot.

[StylinRed]

sounds like Obama is about to announce some gun control initiatives right now





edit: yep he says he's going to do something but no indication as to what says he'll be discussing it with experts in the coming weeks

[jlo mein]

A lot good carrying gun did. Carrying a gun did not save any lives it just ended up getting another person shot.

List of defensive gun use incidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defensive_gun_use_incidents)

Read, learn.

For everyone who thinks the national media is unbiased, read this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

Everyone has heard of Columbine and Virginia Tech. Did anyone hear about this 2002 School of Law shooting where armed citizen response stopped the shooter? The news outlets downplayed the use of a legally carried gun and made this story fade away.

[Manic!]

List of defensive gun use incidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defensive_gun_use_incidents)

Read, learn.

For everyone who thinks the national media is unbiased, read this one:

Appalachian School of Law shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting)

Everyone has heard of Columbine and Virginia Tech. Did anyone hear about this 2002 School of Law shooting where armed citizen response stopped the shooter? The news outlets downplayed the use of a legally carried gun and made this story fade away.

So the problem are the solution are the same?

[SkinnyPupp]

Piers Morgan didn't let John Lott get a word in edge wise, but Lott did manage to get one fundamental point across. In the Aurora, Colorado theatre shooting, there were six movie theatres close to the shooter's home. He didn't go to shoot people at the closest movie theatre. He chose the movie theatre that was specifically marked as a gun free zone, where he knew no one in the theatre would be armed. He wanted to shoot and murder defenseless citizens. As soonas he was confronted by armed police officers (arriving too late to save the long list of victims), he gave up and surrendered. He had no intention of resisting armed force, he only wanted to release carnage on defenseless people.

If he had gone to a theatre where a bunch of other people had guns, the death toll would have been much higher. If his goal was to kill as many people as possible, he made the wrong decision.

[jlo mein]

If he had gone to a theatre where a bunch of other people had guns, the death toll would have been much higher. If his goal was to kill as many people as possible, he made the wrong decision.

I assume you are speculating that return fire at the active shooter by legally armed citizens would increase the death toll in this situation.

Did you not read the Tacoma Mall shooting? Or the Clackamas Town Center shooting? Even the Appalachian School of Law shooting? All involved legally armed citizens confronting the active shooter. In none of these cases were innocent bystanders shot by legally armed citizens. In two of these cases legally armed citizens chose NOT to fire because innocent bystanders were behind their target, in the line of fire.

CCW holders are not brazen vigiliantes out to shoot first and ask questions later. They follow the four fundamental safety rules, the relevant one in this case being be sure of your target and what is in front of and behind it.

Is everyone not surprised that these documented cases of active shooters being confronted by CCW holders were not widely publicized by the national news media? I'm betting almost NO ONE here has heard of the Appalachian School of Law shooting. It happened three years after Columbine and generated little news. Does no one believe that the national news media like CNN and MSNBC have their own agenda? They are profit making ventures! Read the Wiki page I posted about defensive incidents involving firearms and tell me how many of those you heard on the news.