Dressed in black combat gear the gunman opened fire at random.

calder12
calder12
Senior MemberPosts: 13,421 in General Discussion
27 reported dead in a Connecticut school shooting bloody kindergarten through grade 4, 18 of them are apparently children. This stuff just turns my stomach over thinking about my own kids.
«13456789

Comments

  • georginacarpet
    georginacarpet
    Registered User Posts: 18
    27 reported dead in a Connecticut school shooting bloody kindergarten through grade 4, 18 of them are apparently children. This stuff just turns my stomach over thinking about my own kids.

    feel sad hearing this kind of news.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    I don't. Pretty fucking used to it now. There was a mall shooting on Monday where two people were killed.

    Makes you want to hold off having children in this country. No safe place but your own home, and even thats a shaky bet.

    yay america
  • Shaun
    Shaun
    Señor Member Brooklyn, NYPosts: 6,544
    We should start a thread called "Mass-shootings in The States". You know, like "Thread of the Dead"? So we can just post in that every time this happens.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    Haha. Yeah, "fuck off" seems almost too flippant, and it happens enough.

    "Fuck off: children being brutally murdered en masse."

    I don't know, maybe a bit cavalier?
  • bennyboy
    bennyboy
    Ah yo Boogie Down B-TownPosts: 3,779
    1912: Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association cancels a live chat with pro-gun country singer Colt Ford.

    Nice.
  • Timus
    Timus
    Heaven Born & Ever Bright Posts: 6,433
    Didn't the NRA march through Colombine just after the shootings there. What a smashing bunch of people.
  • Rawiri
    Rawiri
    Have at you sire Posts: 1,415
    They were protesting there right to bear arms Timus....against George III and the English Redcoats. Kind of "shoots" that argument out of the water really
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    I'm not a gun advocate, I don't shoot anything and I don't now, nor have I ever owned a gun. That being said gun control isn't likely the answer here. Crazy people and criminals aren't really likely to pay attention to whether they're allowed to own a gun or not.

    There isn't an answer to this kind of thing, it's just sad that's all. People using it for a platform for or against gun control is just that much sadder. These are dead people, dead children, not a political platform. Just my opinion for what it's worth.
  • Limbo
    Limbo
    Established Norm Posts: 27,307
    No guns = No shootings.

    Need to get rid of the psychopaths too.
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    The idea was that the populace could carry arms in case the young republic were to be attacked and an army needed to be put together quickly. The amendment should have been rescinded by 1800 at the latest.
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    Limbo wrote:
    No guns = No shootings.

    Need to get rid of the psychopaths too.

    According to the statistics put forward by Michael Moore (I have no idea if they're accurate or not and being 5 minutes to the weekend I'm not going to Google them right now) there are more guns per capita here in Canada than in the States, yet we have a fraction of the gun related crime they do.

    I think the second part of your statement would go a lot further to solving the problems.

    @Steve - Yeah very true.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    I'm not opposed to most guns. I grew up around them and they were a part of my identity growing up in the south.

    I am opposed to automatic rifles and 100 round clips, and shit even a semi-automatic weapon ban might be beneficial.

    I don't actually think it's merely the presence of guns that are the root cause of this. It's the mentality and the behavior that inevitably result in the use of a certain tool as a means to an end.

    As calder notes, we're not alone in our level of gun ownership, nor are we the leader. I think culturally we've hit some sort of fucked up zenith. I don't know what the cure for that is. I don't think anyone does. I think it's a unique set of horrible circumstances that breed that sort of psychopathic behavior in this country and it maybe too late to undo it.
  • teapoted
    teapoted
    ~ Posts: 7,089
    calder12 wrote:
    According to the statistics put forward by Michael Moore (I have no idea if they're accurate or not and being 5 minutes to the weekend I'm not going to Google them right now) there are more guns per capita here in Canada than in the States, yet we have a fraction of the gun related crime they do.

    I think the second part of your statement would go a lot further to solving the problems.

    @Steve - Yeah very true.
    Nonsense. There are significantly more guns per capita in the US than any other country. Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    More importantly in countries like Canada or Sweden which have 1/3rd of that statistic, those are hunting weapons, not 'self defense'.
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    As I said I wasn't positive it was accurate and I said guns, not self defence nor small arms, which that table you produced is talking about, it doesn't include long weapons. That and right at the top it says this article's factual accuracy is disputed.

    In the end it's probably relatively accurate and I either remembered what was said in the movie wrong or the movie itself was wrong. Doesn't change the fact that Canada averages around 200 or less firearm murders a year even though we are a relatively highly armed populace.
  • Aibrean
    Aibrean
    Brutally Honest Posts: 2,458
    To lay some facts down, the gunman didn't get those guns legally. In that state, assault rifles have been banned from purchase since 1993. In order to get a handgun, even in private sale, you have to have a permit to buy. In order to get a permit you have to have not committed a felony or any of 11 misdemeanor offenses. The permit is only good for five years. You have to have a background check, criminal history check, submit fingerprints and photographs. You also have to complete a handgun safety course. Even in private sale you have to have a background check done. Otherwise you're both committing a class D felony.

    It isn't about gun control here. The gunman stole guns. The issue is how did he get into the school, past security. Why did it take police so long to arrive? If the law-abiding citizens in the school are not able to protect themselves, who will protect them?

    One of my friends also suggested that mental health checks be a part of well-child visits. I think there are more issues at play in here. Plenty of parents today rely on other avenues for parenting, especially those who are completely working families. I'm not saying this is the case in this situation, but I wouldn't be surprised.

    Oh and you know...banning guns REALLY works for Washington D.C.

    Some stats...
    Total crime victims statistics - countries compared - Nationmaster
    Assault victims statistics - Countries Compared - NationMaster

    (by percentage of total population).
  • bennyboy
    bennyboy
    Ah yo Boogie Down B-TownPosts: 3,779
    Guns were his mums, whom he shot first - she worked at the school, so no doubt he was known to the people working there.

    It is about gun control - why did his mum have several guns? For what? Security? Ridiculous.

    Introduce some serious gun control, and this wouldn't keep happening every 3 months.

    Insane, cornflakes and assault rifles:

    Hunting Rifles, Shotguns and Ammo for Less - Walmart.com
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    Illegal or not, he had access to those guns. They were in his home. It seems his mother, a kindergarten teacher, had shooting as a hobby.

    It's interesting you should think about how it is possible for a person to get past the school's security. Have you any idea what the rest of the world thinks about a society where pupils MUST be searched daily for weaponry? If you have, would you care enough to examine what it is in your society which makes it necessary?

    I see the Onion is already passing it off as naff humour. Right To Own Handheld Device That Shoots Deadly Metal Pellets At High Speed Worth All Of This | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

    Calling the USA a mentally sick society doesn't even come close. This gun legislation coupled with its vicious, self-destructive foreign policy make it even more obvious that America's worst enemies are right there at home. But it's overkill to target the very youngest first. Al-Qa'ida members love humanity more.
  • bennyboy
    bennyboy
    Ah yo Boogie Down B-TownPosts: 3,779
    Michigan has just signed legislation that says its OK to carry a concealed weapon into a school.

    And now, they say that this law WOULD HAVE HELPED yesterday. I assume their feverish little brains imagined some kind of scenario where all the teachers could whip out the semi-automatics they'd finally been allowed to carry, and start pumping lead into the gunman?

    Amazing.

    Once again, ridiculous.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    Or one teacher loses his shit when someone spills a capri sun all over the crayolas and then we have another classroom full of dead kids.
  • teapoted
    teapoted
    ~ Posts: 7,089
    It isn't about gun control here. The gunman stole guns. The issue is how did he get into the school, past security.
    Only Americans think like this. If you don't have guns, you don't have gun culture, you don't have frequent gun crime. I'd also hazard to guess that countries with strict gun control also have a lot less illegal weapons. Being surrounded by violence and people constantly bickering about how it's your inalienable right to carry mass-murdering weapons leads to people committing crimes more than in civilized countries where people are scared about carrying a kitchen knife in their suitcase on the tube because they might get mistaken for a yute thug.

    The issue is how did he get into the school? You shouldn't need fucking security at a school. In Sweden you can go ahead and walk right into any school you like, because our streets aren't littered with gun-wielding psychopaths.

    This will never be fixed as the US is a country run by corporations, and you can't take away peoples guns without someone losing a ton of money.
  • teapoted
    teapoted
    ~ Posts: 7,089
    Aibrean wrote:
    Those stats are irrelevant as each country has different laws and different levels of enforcement. If anything a low number could just mean that the police does fuck all.

    Edit:
    It even says on that page
    Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    I have missed you teapoted (not gay).
  • Aibrean
    Aibrean
    Brutally Honest Posts: 2,458
    Ok...cars killed 32,310 people in the USA last year. I think we should start to look at banning cars...or at least making sure people who are drunk or don't have a license or are too young shouldn't drive them. And old people...plenty should have classes to make sure they are able to drive.

    There was a robbery outside my work a few weeks ago. The police HQ are two blocks away. It took them 30 minutes to get on scene.
  • Signum
    Signum
    Bliss™ Posts: 4,557
    People don't drive cars around with the intention of mass murder Aibrean. They are not the same thing.
  • CM_
    CM_
    Something Posts: 13,770
    Get rid of guns, no one truly needs a gun.

    Don't understand why some folk stubbornly refuse so give them up
  • CM_
    CM_
    Something Posts: 13,770
    Aibrean wrote:
    Ok...cars killed 32,310 people in the USA last year. I think we should start to look at banning cars...or at least making sure people who are drunk or don't have a license or are too young shouldn't drive them. And old people...plenty should have classes to make sure they are able to drive.

    There was a robbery outside my work a few weeks ago. The police HQ are two blocks away. It took them 30 minutes to get on scene.


    You just want to be able to continue recreationally shooting your assault rifles. If it was one of your family members that got shot up you might be more willing to give up your hobby.
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    Those are different subjects. Few traffic accidents are predetermined in the same way as these mass shootings, although I believe a percentage of head-on collisions are deliberate suicides. Are you arguing in favor of the Second Amendment, Aibrean? Have you no shame?
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    If you want to understand our infamous "right to bear arms" analyzed by someone truly knowledgable on the subject:

    Reframing the constitutional debate over gun control. - Slate Magazine

    Citizen's "right to bear arms" was not prescribed by the original framers of the constitution nor is it guaranteed in the bill of rights. The frequent arguments to that appeal to those myths (coming from elected leaders, the NRA and other corporate interests and idiots) are complete bullshit.
  • bennyboy
    bennyboy
    Ah yo Boogie Down B-TownPosts: 3,779
    Aibrean wrote:
    Ok...cars killed 32,310 people in the USA last year. I think we should start to look at banning cars...

    Jesus wept. This is all gun supporters ever say, as though it wins the argument. Incredibly stupid.
  • Aibrean
    Aibrean
    Brutally Honest Posts: 2,458
    Signum wrote:
    People don't drive cars around with the intention of mass murder Aibrean. They are not the same thing.

    So you're saying all gun owners are only interested in killing people? I certainly don't own guns for the intention of mass murder. Sick people are sick people. Murderers and criminals will find a way to do evil no matter what. Recidivism rates are high. People go unchecked even though there are warning signs.
  • bennyboy
    bennyboy
    Ah yo Boogie Down B-TownPosts: 3,779
    [yt]N-5V2ZbX4i4[/yt]
  • teapoted
    teapoted
    ~ Posts: 7,089
    Aibrean wrote:
    Ok...cars killed 32,310 people in the USA last year. I think we should start to look at banning cars...or at least making sure people who are drunk or don't have a license or are too young shouldn't drive them. And old people...plenty should have classes to make sure they are able to drive.

    There was a robbery outside my work a few weeks ago. The police HQ are two blocks away. It took them 30 minutes to get on scene.
    I don't know if you purposely don't see things like a logical human being or if this is just a product of your schooling, because if it is the latter, then that would be the source of all these problems.

    Cars could kill 100 times more people than they do currently and it would still be a more significant factor to the betterment of the human race than any weaponry. But either way, that's a problem that you can fix without bans, as demonstrated by the data, Sweden has the lowest rate of any remotely populated country. Because yes, it is hard to get a license, people buy safer cars, etc... They also don't start drinking 5 years 'after' they learn how to drive, which is just asking for drunk drivers.
  • Signum
    Signum
    Bliss™ Posts: 4,557
    Aibrean wrote:
    So you're saying all gun owners are only interested in killing people? I certainly don't own guns for the intention of mass murder. Sick people are sick people. Murderers and criminals will find a way to do evil no matter what. Recidivism rates are high. People go unchecked even though there are warning signs.

    No, I didn't say that.

    But still what I said stands, you can't drive a car into a school to slaughter children. Having millions of guns available to buy in America means that you're happy for more kiddies to get their heads blown off if it means you can hang on to your stockpile of weaponry then?

    You like firing guns, OK, we get that. I suppose it gives you some sort of power trip... whatever. But all these arguments about "well the bad guys will find a way to do evil no matter what" are completely absurd. Yeah, they probably will find a way, but you know what? If you take guns out of the equation it reduces the risk. It'll be harder for them to do as much damage. Case in point.

    Lets also take into consideration there have been 31 shooting massacres since columbine. Thirty-fucking-one. Fifteen of the 25 worst mass shootings in the last 50 years took place in the US. Is that enough to convince you that you need to fucking do something about this shit??

    So if reducing or eliminating guns is not the answer what should be done then?

    I suppose you think that you should arm all the teachers? You trust all the teachers to carry a firearm around your kids? What if one of them snaps and decides he/she's had enough. Whose going to be around to take them out? It's fucking ridiculous, the whole fucking world can't understand why you insist on maintaining this absurd second amendment 'right'. It added to the constitution at a time when the threat of the red coats was real, and the need for a 'well regulated militia' was justifiable. Not in the supposedly civilised 21st century.

    The amount of right wing fucknut comments I've read in the past 24hrs that basically equate to "what you commie libruls (sic) don't understand is that when the whole world goes to shit, we'll have all the guns and y'all be throwing sticks and stones at each other lol". Should I categorise you in the same group as these tinfoil hat wearing loonbags Aibrean? Do you belive the g'vment is coming to take away your freedoms and/or guns, and that you'll need to defend yourself against the feds?

    Jesus titty fucking christ.
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    A liberal gun owner's point of view (moderately interesting):

    Tactical Reality | TPM Editors Blog

    This whole guns and psycho mass murder discussion deserves it's own thread.
  • Bishop
    Bishop
    Eating out. Posts: 6,896
    Guns, they are designed to kill shit.
    even if 99.9% of the population are educated enough and sane enough to not go postal on a bunch of school kids, the risk alone of having .1 % of gun owners that could potentially kill one person out of spite hatred ect let alone kill children and schoolmates. Is enough to say " I don't need to have a gun ".

    I see no need to have a gun other than to arm yourself from others that are arming themselves because you are arming yourself.

    To quote handcraftedweb's link.
    The gun culture that we have today in the U.S. is not the gun culture, so to speak, that I remember from my youth. It’s too simple to say that it’s “sick;” it’s more accurately an absurd fetishization.
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    Such a polarized topic. Gun advocates think that stricter gun laws won't help at all. The opposing side thinks it will solve everything. I actually have one friend that thinks the Batman shooting thing would have been better if the victims were armed and could shoot back >.< (In his defence he's an older gentleman from Texas)

    I saw a supposed quote from Morgan Freeman on Facebook that makes a lot of sense, it seems that he never said it though.
    "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."

    I have to wonder how much we do have to blame the media. Of course there is the argument they are just reporting the "news" but I think we all know there is more to it than that, news isn't non-biased and it is certainly more about the ratings than it is about just telling people what is going on, the more gory or sensational the story the more airplay it gets.

    There doesn't seem to be any responsibility in journalism, at least not at the CNN level. I am terribly disturbed by the interviewing of third graders after such a harrowing experience, even more disturbed that the parents allowed it, but then I suppose we live in a world with Honey Boo Boo so nothing to do with how parents act should really surprise me.

    These things always come down to gun control advocates vs the NRA types. Does anyone actually believe that is the real problem? Or even the biggest problem? I don't know, I am not a history buff, did we have mass shootings when every cowboy in America was armed? Again, I'm not an advocate for guns, quite the opposite actually. It just seems to me we are focusing our efforts in the wrong places.

    I know for a fact in my city years ago a lot of mental patients were released not because they were capable of taking care of themselves but because there was no budget for the city/province/country to take care of them any longer.

    My opinion on guns?

    Assault rifles are for the military and police, anything with a clip over 5 rounds shouldn't be owned by the public. Same goes for hand guns. Hand guns and assault rifles have one purpose in their design, to kill people. The general public has no need to do this, not a legitimate one therefore they have no need for the ability to own these weapons. Hunting rifles have no need to be semi automatic, nor do shot guns. If you need to fire bullets as fast as you can pull the trigger you're a shitty hunter anyway and should find a new hobby. That being said, I really honestly don't think changing these things will result in less killings. The weapons are always available, there are so many of them in the US now that it will take decades if not centuries to significantly reduce the number to the point where they're hard to get. There are other things that can and should be done along with stricter gun control, but the argument always comes down to just that...
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    Aibrean wrote:
    Ok...cars killed 32,310 people in the USA last year. I think we should start to look at banning cars...or at least making sure people who are drunk or don't have a license or are too young shouldn't drive them. And old people...plenty should have classes to make sure they are able to drive.
    What a load of absolute and total bollocks.

    Cars were designed as a mode of transport. They can be dangerous machines in either the wrong or incapable hands, but their primary function is to transport people from one location to another.

    Guns too are dangerous in the wrong or incapable hands, but the difference is their primary function is to facilitate the killing of either another person or animal.

    So you're comparing a machine which can kill when used improperly (which can be said of almost any machine ever built), with one that was designed for that sole purpose.

    Which is obviously a load of shit.
  • slate
    slate
    Senior Member Posts: 6,137
    I've tried not to read too much about this horrific story as its become all too familiar. There is a large population in American that is seriously fucking stupid.

    Blaming sick people for mass murders is putting a band aid on a very sick problem. Yes if they were sane, chances are they wouldn't walk into a school, or a theatre, or a mall and kill 25+ people. But take away the weapon and their plot becomes almost impossible to accomplish.

    How would one explain the other 9,000+ firearm deaths in the US that weren't part of crazy ramages? The fact of the matter is guns kill people, they were made to kill, not to play with.

    You want to own a 100 round assault rifle for recreational use, get a new fucking hobby, or buy the latest Call of Duty and kill all the people you want.

    note: Someone that said we should be worried about how he actually got into the school. I've never seen any security in any school in Canada. (maybe some of the huge inner-city ones) And so a metal detector goes off. It's not like they have 6 people there with a barricade waiting. Security guards don't even carry guns in Canada. Someone walks in with an assault rifle, people are going to die.
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    Being good American, I think I'll get me one of these:
    [yt]SNPJMk2fgJU[/yt]
    For self defense, of course. Remember, quad-roto-guns don't kill people, people kill people.
  • Bishop
    Bishop
    Eating out. Posts: 6,896
    calder12 wrote:
    The weapons are always available, there are so many of them in the US now that it will take decades if not centuries to significantly reduce the number to the point where they're hard to get. There are other things that can and should be done along with stricter gun control, but the argument always comes down to just that...

    Well put, but I really don't like the attitude ( in general ) that if something is wrong and there is a way to fix it but it will take a few years or even decades to see the results then it is not worth while.

    I agree that it is not the primary answer and something else needs to be done as well but if we made an effort right now to eradicate guns so that in 30 years the guns wouldn't be so accessible to mass murderers gang members ect and the gun culture that exists would be tiny by comparison, then wouldn't that still be worth it.
    The longer people sit by and say that it would take too long, the longer our children and their children have to suffer.

    Slightly off subject but relevant..
    A bit like the womans rights movement, taken over a century in this country to get everything on an even keel. Still not right but it is getting there because somebody in the late 1800's decided we needed a change. All the bullshit that came with it over that time was worth it because of the end goal.
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    Agreed, I didn't intend to make that sound like "if it will take too long why bother", I was just trying to say there are other things that can be done in the meantime.

    As Slate said there is no security in Canadian schools that I know of (I am not positive about Toronto but I assume it's the same there). The closest to security I've seen was my youngest daughter's elementary school where the doors were locked and on a buzzer system once classes started, but simply buzzing and saying who you were got you in so not exactly security, more a measure against people wandering in without the school knowing they were there.
  • KingCraig
    KingCraig
    ~ ChesterPosts: 7,224
    Because this is the answer

    Jesus Christansen on a fucking bicycle.
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    How do you even respond to something that stupid?

    Oh...wait Craig already responded appropriately.
  • KingCraig
    KingCraig
    ~ ChesterPosts: 7,224
    Why stop there. Give each child a handgun so they can protect themselves.
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    They'll end up with fucking ED-209s teaching classes...
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    I think if the US government scrapped its Eighteenth Century constitution, jailed its political leaders, reappropriated the wealth from the giant corporations and embarked on a decade long compulsory education campaign to teach every American citizen to read and write, it might be possible to look forward to a period where a much more socialist-thinking populace would see the benefits of co-operation instead of confrontation. The need for guns would be gone.

    They have nothing to lose. Nothing.
  • Shaun
    Shaun
    Señor Member Brooklyn, NYPosts: 6,544
    The only positive to come out of tragedies like these? It makes it so much easier for you to determine who you should unfriend on Facebook.
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    Anyone else getting sick and tired of the way the media is milking this story for all its worth? There is no more information anyone could possibly want or need. Shall we watch the children's funerals live on CNN followed by in-depth interviews with the grieving parents?

    The cops are talking about discovering the perp's "motivation". They must be as insane as the perp. How could there be a motivation for such an act?

    Somewhere today I read that the perp's mother had her collection of guns "in case the worst should happen". It certainly did.
  • Rawiri
    Rawiri
    Have at you sire Posts: 1,415
    steveb wrote:
    Somewhere today I read that the perp's mother had her collection of guns "in case the worst should happen". It certainly did.

    That perfectly encapsulates the argument as to why they need gun control. I fear the irony may go unnoticed
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    steveb wrote:
    Somewhere today I read that the perp's mother had her collection of guns "in case the worst should happen". It certainly did.
    Yeah, a "survivalist" apparently, intent on stocking up on as many supplies and weapons as possible because she believed that sooner rather than later everything would go tits-up, chaos-and-anarchy-style.

    Instead she was gunned down by her fucking looney tune of a son.
  • David
    David
    Keeping Tom Happy Posts: 12,931
    steveb wrote:
    There is no more information anyone could possibly want or need. Shall we watch the children's funerals live on CNN followed by in-depth interviews with the grieving parents?.

    The fact that parents are upset over their children dying is definately not news - it's all a bit goulish to me, they were trying to interview a kid who knew one of the victims on the morning news today - I think that's a little but fucked up

    the media are at least a part of the problem - there should be sensible agreed guidelines for the way massacres are reported
  • Rawiri
    Rawiri
    Have at you sire Posts: 1,415
    Wonder if she was preparing for the zombie apocalypse, the rapture, communist invasion, the war on terrrrr or one of the other numerous gun hoarding justifications that regularly get trotted out...by red neck fuckwits
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    Rawiri wrote:
    Wonder if she was preparing for the zombie apocalypse, the rapture, communist invasion, the war on terrrrr or one of the other numerous gun hoarding justifications that regularly get trotted out...by red neck fuckwits
    Said on the radio this morning it was just your bog-standard "collapse of civilization", rather than anything interesting like the Zombie Apocalypse.
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    They're usually convinced the gummint is a-comin' to take their freedom. There's also been a lot of talk about the US joining up with Canada and Mexico to form one giant world dominating state. One would think they might quite like that.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    Being good American, I think I'll get me one of these:
    [yt]SNPJMk2fgJU[/yt]
    For self defense, of course. Remember, quad-roto-guns don't kill people, people kill people.

    That's pretty badass, actually.
  • steveb
    steveb
    BitterHusk Original™ Järvenpää FinlandPosts: 24,076
    Not if they end up with a Canadian-style subsidized health system and Mexican-style wage levels. They also fear the US dollar will be replaced by a new currency called the amero.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    I'm talking about the Skynet-style flying gun.
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    Giraffe wrote:
    I'm talking about the Skynet-style flying gun.
    Yeah, I did think "Hunter-Killer" when I watched that...
  • Shaun
    Shaun
    Señor Member Brooklyn, NYPosts: 6,544
    The new thread name is shit.
  • dh
    dh
    aka Mr Hound Posts: 5,431
    There is another solution and as unlikely to be initiated.

    Stop naming these fuckers.

    Blanket reporting ban.

    You can name the victims but not the perp or their family.

    Doesn't matter if it gets loose via Tweets if it has too, just keep it off of the telly, keep it out of the papers keep it out of history.
  • Shaun
    Shaun
    Señor Member Brooklyn, NYPosts: 6,544
    [yt]PezlFNTGWv4[/yt]
  • dh
    dh
    aka Mr Hound Posts: 5,431
    There is another solution and as unlikely to be initiated.

    Stop naming these fuckers.

    Blanket reporting ban.

    You can name the victims but not the perp or their family.

    Doesn't matter if it gets loose via Tweets if it has too, just keep it off of the telly, keep it out of the papers keep it out of history.
  • calder12
    calder12
    Senior Member Posts: 13,421
    Yeah that was the gist of the fake Morgan Freeman quote I posted. Making these fuckers famous is definitely part of the problem, so is allowing things like serial killer trading cards to be created and sold...
  • Rawiri
    Rawiri
    Have at you sire Posts: 1,415
    Serial killer trading cards? I'm sorry, what was that?
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    Yeah, where can I get me a mint Jeffrey Dahlmer?
  • Shaun
    Shaun
    Señor Member Brooklyn, NYPosts: 6,544
    My James Holmes card just went down in value. Anyone know why?
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    too soon
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    It doesn't bother me. It isn't much different from glamorizing other shit like war and killing through digital media.
  • Rawiri
    Rawiri
    Have at you sire Posts: 1,415
    Now I think of it, I did find a Fred West when I dug up our patio
  • slate
    slate
    Senior Member Posts: 6,137
    Heard on the news this morning that they had the whole area in lock down again. As there was a "suspicious man" walking around.

    Probably a homeless guy pushing a cart, but everyone is going ot get worked up over.
  • Matt_e11
    Matt_e11
    Grammatically inconsisten Posts: 5,070
    Has religion been mentioned as the cause yet?
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    Uh
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    KingCraig wrote:
    Because this is the answer

    Jesus Christansen on a fucking bicycle.

    Wait until the first angry unbalanced student manages to get hold of teacher's gun.
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    NRA kills Facebook account (defaces itself?)

    NRA's Social Silence | Adweek

    It's time to make noise, everyone that has influence on US policy (which includes every US citizen, but maybe others) and wants to reform gun laws. The time is now.

    is #guncontrol the twitter focal point?
  • roto
    roto
    |-/ Posts: 12,958
    Feast your eyes on more bullshit courtesy of the band Cake on facebook:

    CwP2d.jpg
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    I just want to say that cars are nowhere near regulated enough.
  • Shaun
    Shaun
    Señor Member Brooklyn, NYPosts: 6,544
    That's 22 children who didn't die in a country with strong gun control.
  • joe_nicklo
    joe_nicklo
    Giraffe Loves Me. Posts: 2,755
    Aibrean wrote:
    To lay some facts down, the gunman didn't get those guns legally. In that state, assault rifles have been banned from purchase since 1993. In order to get a handgun, even in private sale, you have to have a permit to buy. In order to get a permit you have to have not committed a felony or any of 11 misdemeanor offenses. The permit is only good for five years. You have to have a background check, criminal history check, submit fingerprints and photographs. You also have to complete a handgun safety course. Even in private sale you have to have a background check done. Otherwise you're both committing a class D felony.

    It isn't about gun control here. The gunman stole guns. The issue is how did he get into the school, past security. Why did it take police so long to arrive? If the law-abiding citizens in the school are not able to protect themselves, who will protect them?

    One of my friends also suggested that mental health checks be a part of well-child visits. I think there are more issues at play in here. Plenty of parents today rely on other avenues for parenting, especially those who are completely working families. I'm not saying this is the case in this situation, but I wouldn't be surprised.

    Oh and you know...banning guns REALLY works for Washington D.C.

    Some stats...
    Total crime victims statistics - countries compared - Nationmaster
    Assault victims statistics - Countries Compared - NationMaster

    (by percentage of total population).

    Agree 100%.

    People are quick to blame the object used to kill someone and completely glaze over the fact that the person pulling the trigger is the one doing the killing.

    If there are no guns, do people really think for one second that the pieces of shit committing these heinous crimes are not going to find an alternate method of murder? Knives, Bombs, Poison, Blunt Objects...those are some things that they'd be sure to resort to.

    A lot of these sickos killing people are just that — sick in the head. They need help.
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    Giraffe wrote:
    If he'd had a couple of Glocks and a semi-automatic assault rifle replace "injured" with "dead".
  • roto
    roto
    |-/ Posts: 12,958
    You have to speak in small words for the NRA folks. Let it be said, for the record, they nowhere near represent all Americans.

    The words "a man entered a school full of children and shot 20 of them" should never have to be written. Period.
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    Agree 100%.

    People are quick to blame the object used to kill someone and completely glaze over the fact that the person pulling the trigger is the one doing the killing.

    If there are no guns, do people really think for one second that the pieces of shit committing these heinous crimes are not going to find an alternate method of murder? Knives, Bombs, Poison, Blunt Objects...those are some things that they'd be sure to resort to.

    A lot of these sickos killing people are just that — sick in the head. They need help.
    Bollocks. Total, total bollocks.

    Yes, he was deranged, but look at the example just posted... With a knife-wielding lunatic we have injured children. With a gun-wielding lunatic we have dead ones.

    The whole point is that the object used by the nutter is a machine designed for one purpose – to kill.

    What in the fuck is any civilian doing with a fucking arsenal of weapons and ammunition like that? And Aibrean's point on them being stolen is moot... They were stolen from his mother who owned them legally.

    Have to edit to add to this, because the whole "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument makes me so angry.

    Yes, people kill people, but having a machine at hand that enables that person, whether mentally ill or just plain evil, to kill lots of people from distance at a rapid rate with little to no risk to themselves, makes things so much easier.

    Do you think these fuckwits would wander into a school with the intention of killing as many as possible with just a knife or blunt instrument?

    Would they bollocks... Because without a gun that means getting up close and personal and requiring some amount of physical strength, thus increasing the risk of being stopped. All it takes is to run into a teacher or two of significant physical strength and determination and you're fucked.

    But if you're armed, then no amount of strength or determination from someone unarmed will be able to stop you.

    And the US pro-gun lobby's answer to this is to add more guns to the equation, by placing them in fucking SCHOOLS!? Instead of removing them from the mainstream?

    How can anyone see that as anything else but madness!?
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    If there are no guns, do people really think for one second that the pieces of shit committing these heinous crimes are not going to find an alternate method of murder?

    I really, truly, unambiguously think, it there were no guns, much less, possibly no kids would have been killed in this incident.
  • LittleMick
    LittleMick
    also known as little dick. The Occupied SixPosts: 8,989
    Why do schools need security in the first place is the real question? You obviously live in a fucked up country if you feel the need for metal detectors and school security staff.
  • roto
    roto
    |-/ Posts: 12,958
    Let's not throw stones, shall we?

    Knife scanners at school gates to curb attacks | UK news
    (which would also mean there are security staff who disarm kids if a knife is detected)

    Queue the "it's only knife crime" response.
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    roto wrote:
    Let's not throw stones, shall we?

    Knife scanners at school gates to curb attacks | UK news | The Observer

    ...but hey, it's only knife crime.
    Jesus wept...

    Yes, KNIFE crime. See my post above on knife vs gun.

    Disarm a child with a knife vs disarming a child with a hand gun. Two very different scenarios!

    It's terrible and something that shouldn't be happening in schools, but are you seriously comparing kids carrying knives to nutcases wandering into schools with semi-automatic hand guns and assault rifles!?
  • LittleMick
    LittleMick
    also known as little dick. The Occupied SixPosts: 8,989
    roto wrote:
    Let's not throw stones, shall we?

    Knife scanners at school gates to curb attacks | UK news
    (which would also mean there are security staff who disarm kids if a knife is detected)

    Queue the "it's only knife crime" response.

    Who is throwing stones? Obviously knife crime has to be dealt with in the UK as well. I made the statement that it is a sad state of affairs that these measures have to be taken. I don't know any schools in Northern Ireland with metal detectors or day time security staff. I know schools with night time security due to sectarian attacks.
  • roto
    roto
    |-/ Posts: 12,958
    OD wrote:
    Jesus wept...

    Yes, KNIFE crime. See my post above on knife vs gun.

    Disarm a child with a knife vs disarming a child with a hand gun. Two very different scenarios!

    It's terrible and something that shouldn't be happening in schools, but are you seriously comparing kids carrying knives to nutcases wandering into schools with semi-automatic hand guns and assault rifles!?


    Jesus didn't read. (and FWIW "Jesus wept." is getting a tad old)

    I'm not joining in with the pro-gun folks at all -- if you've read my previous posts in this thread. Read LittleMik's post then mine. I was responding to a sweeping generalization...there are fucked up people trying to do fucked up things everywhere.

    I'd rather see no weapons at all...settle shit with fists! ;)
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    roto wrote:
    Jesus didn't read. (and FWIW "Jesus wept." is getting a tad old)
    Confused as to what this even means...

    And "Jesus wept" is a turn of phrase.

    But fair enough, carry on.
  • joe_nicklo
    joe_nicklo
    Giraffe Loves Me. Posts: 2,755
    All I'm saying is, that if a person has mental issues to the point that they are intent on killing someone, they will find another way to do it. If you think otherwise, well I guess you have more faith in humanity than I do.

    Here are a few examples:

    • Oklahoma City Bombing - No guns used here. Murder accomplished with a rental truck full of fertilizer based explosives. 168 dead (including many children in an onsite day care).

    • 2005 London Subway Bombings. 52 dead, 700 injured. Again, no guns.

    • A MUCH larger scale — 9/11. The terrorists did not need guns to murder people. Only Box cutters and commerical airliners used to murder 2,996 people (my sister included).

    • Bath, Michigan School Massacre. 1927. Murder accomplished with explosives. 44 victims (equal to the Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres combined).

    Here's more...
    The Butcher’s Bill – Non-gun mass murders: « The Bluff

    Let's get our Anti-Gun mentality out of our heads and start thinking of the bigger picture. How about ANTI-VIOLENCE?

    The point here is, that if someone has it in their head that they want to murder a person or a group of people, they're going to do it with or without guns.
  • Giraffe
    Giraffe
    toxic designer Posts: 9,841
    Some people might say that limiting the number of people one maniac can kill with a single loaded gun would be a great way to reduce violence.

    And yes, bombings happen. But from a commonsense and practicality standpoint we can't heavily regulate and control every single individual product required to make homemade explosives.

    We can, however, regulate one product manufactured with that sole purpose. Which has been the larger point here.

    And many of those people have resources and exposure to group ideology that factors into their actions. They're not the impulses of one mentally ill person. There's a great difference of context you need to acknowledge.
  • LittleMick
    LittleMick
    also known as little dick. The Occupied SixPosts: 8,989
    What the G man said.
  • OD
    OD
    mODerator Posts: 8,303
    Anti-violence would be great.

    And I don't think otherwise. All I'm saying is the availability of weapons in the US makes it a hell of a lot easier.
  • joe_nicklo
    joe_nicklo
    Giraffe Loves Me. Posts: 2,755
    Giraffe wrote:
    Some people might say that limiting the number of people one maniac can kill with a single loaded gun would be a great way to reduce violence.

    And yes, bombings happen. But from a commonsense and practicality standpoint we can't heavily regulate and control every single individual product required to make homemade explosives.

    We can, however, regulate one product manufactured with that sole purpose. Which has been the larger point here.

    And many of those people have resources and exposure to group ideology that factors into their actions. They're not the impulses of one mentally ill person. There's a great difference of context you need to acknowledge.

    I listed multiple examples. Individuals and groups carrying out mass murders. I dont disagree that guns need to be heavily regulated but I just feel like the human race as a whole is just disgusting and there are people who will murder just because "they can". It really makes me question whether or not I want to have children.
  • Signum
    Signum
    Bliss™ Posts: 4,557
    The point here is, that if someone has it in their head that they want to murder a person or a group of people, they're going to do it with or without guns.

    No the point is if they have guns it's much, much easier for them.
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    All I'm saying is, that if a person has mental issues to the point that they are intent on killing someone, they will find another way to do it.

    You have no way of knowing that, you're just manufacturing a theory to support your world view.

    Do you know all gun murderers would have used other means to accomplish the same destruction if they didn't have access to guns? If you answer "yes" you have an incredibly powerful denial mechanism at your disposal.
  • teapoted
    teapoted
    ~ Posts: 7,089
    Let's get our Anti-Gun mentality out of our heads and start thinking of the bigger picture. How about ANTI-VIOLENCE?

    The point here is, that if someone has it in their head that they want to murder a person or a group of people, they're going to do it with or without guns.
    By this argument there should be no gun control at all. You should let people walk into a store and buy nuclear warheads. Psychopath's gonna psychopath anyway right?
    I listed multiple examples. Individuals and groups carrying out mass murders. I dont disagree that guns need to be heavily regulated but I just feel like the human race as a whole is just disgusting and there are people who will murder just because "they can". It really makes me question whether or not I want to have children.
    Congratulations, you listed a bunch of bombings. You know what's not legal to own? Bombs. You know why we have so few bombings? Control of chemicals to make them.

    Most knives aren't legal to carry around here either.
  • Rawiri
    Rawiri
    Have at you sire Posts: 1,415
    Thanks Teapoted, spot on, same to OD, Giraffe etc. If some fuckwit feels compelled to kill someone let's not make it easier for them with the availability of guns.
  • handcraftedweb
    handcraftedweb
    thought leader Left coastPosts: 6,743
    I like the video game theory: it's all because video games have desensitized people to gun violence. Therefore I propose a ban on video games. And a ban on making your hand into the shape of a gun and pointing it at people and going "bang".
Sign In or Register to comment.
© Copyright 2003 - 2016 - DT by Kooc Media
Web Hosting by Inmotion