If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Connecticut)   Connecticut school shooting thread, Part 3. Bring the ongoing discussion/bar fight here   (connecticut.cbslocal.com) divider line 2792
    More: Followup, CBS, school shootings, Connecticut Post, emergency evacuation, Columbine High School, CBSNewYork, Newtown, Connecticut State Police  
•       •       •

11288 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Dec 2012 at 3:34 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



2792 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | » | Last
 
2012-12-15 02:07:14 AM

PaulieattheTap: evaned: 2This site gives US per capita car ownership at ~450 cars/1000 ppl. This site gives US per capita gun ownership at about 88.8 guns/100 people, or around twice the car rate.

Comparing 1 / 1000 and 1 / 100 is not equal.

I think you need to look at the rations RATIOS between the GRAAAFFSS and make another opinion.

I come up with 8.88 / 1000.

/ Math is easy especially when using 10ths, 100ths and 1000thns


FTFM
 
2012-12-15 02:09:03 AM

PaulieattheTap: evaned: 2This site gives US per capita car ownership at ~450 cars/1000 ppl. This site gives US per capita gun ownership at about 88.8 guns/100 people, or around twice the car rate.

Comparing 1 / 1000 and 1 / 100 is not equal.

I think you need to look at the rations between the GRAAAFFSS and make another opinion.

I come up with 8.88 / 1000.

/ Math is easy especially when using 10ths, 100ths and 1000thns


Er you might want to check yours again. 88.8 guns/100 ppl = 888/1000, not 8.88/1000.

450 cars/1000 people is about one car for every two people; 88.8 guns/100 people is about one gun per person. Double the rate.
 
2012-12-15 02:13:25 AM

muck4doo: iq_in_binary: muck4doo: whatshisname: muck4doo: Slackfumasta: muck4doo: Slackfumasta: studebaker hoch: What if TV networks had a policy to never make a national news story out of these things when they do happen? Same way TV networks don't televise drunks at ballgames who run onto the field. The idea is not new.

Never gonna happen because capitalism. Too much money to be made by sensationalizing these events with 72 hours of coverage, interviews with 'experts', flashy graphics and catchy slogans.

Not gonna happen because idiots like yourself also want to capitalize this on a way to get your gun grabbing derp message through too.

I never said we should grab guns, moron.

The first step is getting thick-headed numbskulls like yourself to admit that guns are part of the problem too.

The first step is getting morons like you to finally take a look at what is wrong with this country, and stop blaming inanimate objects.

No, the first step is to try and get you to realize that you're arguing irrelevant details. Many other countries have the same issues with mental health and class gaps and their citizens don't solve it by shooting 26 children.

So mental health is irrelevant in this case, and lets look at the gun? I'm done with you. As long as morons keep wanting to focus on the tool rather than the illness this crap is going to continue. Hooray for the easy road though, blame the chunk of inanimate steel.

They actually do have somewhat of a point. You can buy guns at Walmart, dude. Walmart. If you're incapable of seeing how that might be a contributing factor to the problem, you're a part of the problem.

Am I saying Walmart shouldn't be able to sell firearms? Hell no. I want to be able to walk into wally world one day and pick up a TAR-21. But it might move things along towards that goal if we decided that somebody more knowledgeable than the pizza-faced punk who thought Heat was AWESOME was at the counter and had plenty of resources at his avail to keep from hand ...


So you refuse to acknowledge whatsover any point that offers contradiction to your gun fetish? Typical. And you wonder why so much damage has been done to the image of gun owners.
 
2012-12-15 02:14:29 AM

COMALite J: To All:

How about this idea? Give the NRA and GOP two choices:

• Constitutional Amendment to do unto the Second Amendment as the Twenty-First did unto the Eighteenth, or

• 100% Single Payer universal health care, including mental health care. No Individual Mandate. No Public Option. Single. Payer.

Make it clear to them that in light of this tragedy, one or the other will happen. Pick one.


Oooh, I like that road to single payer!
 
2012-12-15 02:20:28 AM
I want to donate some money to a gun control advocacy group, any suggestions?

The Brady Campaign? VPC?

//I've been so charitable this year - first Obama, then Wikipedia now gun control...
 
2012-12-15 02:21:33 AM
Bedtime for me I think. Sleep as well as you can, all.
 
2012-12-15 02:22:17 AM
Sorry if I missed earlier recommendations for donations... it's a huge thread...
 
2012-12-15 02:23:30 AM

Jim_Callahan: Congratulations, you're advocating something almost literally identical to Jim Crow laws. Great job, sport.


Don't be a moron. People voting doesn't kill anyone. Get a farking clue. I guess you probably couldn't pass the tests....
 
2012-12-15 02:23:43 AM

evaned: PaulieattheTap: evaned: 2This site gives US per capita car ownership at ~450 cars/1000 ppl. This site gives US per capita gun ownership at about 88.8 guns/100 people, or around twice the car rate.

Comparing 1 / 1000 and 1 / 100 is not equal.

I think you need to look at the rations between the GRAAAFFSS and make another opinion.

I come up with 8.88 / 1000.

/ Math is easy especially when using 10ths, 100ths and 1000thns

Er you might want to check yours again. 88.8 guns/100 ppl = 888/1000, not 8.88/1000.

450 cars/1000 people is about one car for every two people; 88.8 guns/100 people is about one gun per person. Double the rate.


I'm tired, OK. I'm not thinking right, had a long work day.

I didn't come here for an argument. I made my post earlier and I'm going to bed.
 
2012-12-15 02:24:14 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: COMALite J: if_i_really_have_to: COMALite J: • Fact: Prior to the invention of SSRIs, multiple-random-victim premeditated school killings (regardless of weapon type: note I did not limit it to just ‶shootings") happened on average about once per decade. Multiple-random-victim premeditated killings regardless of where they took place (schools or otherwise) were not much more common.

babble

FACT Maybe there's just something really, really wrong with America.

FACT Maybe the sociopathically self-obsessed and self-interested culture fostered by the "Me Generation" started in the late 70s hasn't worked out that well for you.

more babble


FACT?

[Inigo Montoya image 400x346]


Just so you know, the ‶FACT?" points you were responding to were posted by if_i_really_have_to, not me. I merely quoted them in my Reply back to him/her.


To All:

Since I jabbed the extreme right wing with my last post, here′s one for the extremist left-winger gun grabbers: why are you now so sure that banning guns outright can actually happen, when many of you are the same people who say (and I agree, by the way) that Prohibition Does Not Work, that it did not work for alcohol and will not work for cannabis either and cannot be made to work?

What makes cannabis (or alcohol, for that matter) different from guns in this regard? Keep in mind that there is no spelled-out Constitutional Right to either cannabis nor alcohol, but there is for guns.
 
2012-12-15 02:28:25 AM
i've been thinking this all day so figured i might as well type it here then go to bed.
after this horrible tragedy today, why can't we just take some time to mourn the dead before inflicting our own political views upon each other? those poor victims were still warm and suddenly piers morgan, alex wagner, rush limbaugh, mike huckabee, michael bloomberg and many others were weighing in. while they were still warm! stop it people. everyone is heartbroken. it's pretty heartbreaking to think how many children die EACH DAY in this miserable, evil world. at what point in man's history have we spent even one day, one day on this planet without people getting butchered by one another?
do any of you really think your inane views are gonna stop what has been going on since day one of human existence?
i'm guessing churches all over the country will be overflowing sunday, as they should be.
i'll be there. because for some of us, that is our only hope and our only source of light.
 
2012-12-15 02:28:44 AM

COMALite J: Thanks. So, as I thought, does not distinguish whether the shooter knew and had some actual grievance against the victims, gang violence, etc. and the sort of thing I′ve been talking about being caused by hypermania and linked to SSRIs, namely, premeditated multiple-random-victim mass killings.


That would mean gang violence has dropped a ton. At the same time, it wasn't unheard of just a few decades back for pregnant women to smoke, drink and even take "diet pills" (aka speed). So, maybe we replaced one cause of problems for another.

That or, since the number of deaths an incidents has stayed flat while the population has grown a lot, this is actually no more of a problem (or even less of a problem) than it ever was before, but because we didn't have a 24 hour news cycle with live feeds from anywhere in the country it didn't feel like a problem until the mid to late 90's when every one of these incidents became a live national tragedy.
 
2012-12-15 02:37:31 AM

COMALite J: Prohibition Does Not Work, that it did not work for alcohol


A person up my family tree refused to shut down his gambling parlor and tavern during the prohibition. It resulted in a woman (can't remember her name) and man coming into the bar and smashing liquor bottles. What did my ancestor do? He shot the man's ear off. Ended up having to do a year in jail.
 
2012-12-15 02:40:48 AM

wambu: misanthropologist: let's debate whether anyone should be making a profit by building killing machines.

Like automobiles?

Like fast-food restaurants?

And how about the black clothing that all these creeps favor?

Yeah, let's distract ourselves with that debate.


Yes, all notable examples of things that have but one purpose - to end life. Yes, let's continue to entertain these red herrings. By your logic we should also enforce a ban on procreation, because birth always leads to death.
 
2012-12-15 02:42:34 AM

drewogatory: A firearm is not something someone can just whip-up. Actually, it is. Very,very common to find simple homemade submachine guns in certain countries where manufactured guns are too expensive/difficult to acquire. A simple google search of "Homemade" or "expedient" firearms would reveal just how easy they are to make. The cat is well and truly out of the bag technology wise.


And yet, despite the ban on such weapons here, nobody bothers to ""whip up" submachine guns.... funny that.
 
2012-12-15 02:45:20 AM

davidphogan: shower_in_my_socks: Police were there within a minute. How long it took them to actually get inside the school might have had something to do with the knowledge that there was a person or persons ARMED WITH GUNS inside. Had the call been "there's a dude swinging a baseball bat at kids" you can bet the police would have gone inside a lot faster.

At Clackamas Town Center earlier this week they tried a new technique of "oh shiat we're the cops and have guns so let's get the fark in there as soon as we have three cops here" method. End result: Two dead, plus the gunman.


Well, that's part of the change in mindset that I was talking about earlier that everyone seems to think is just so impossible to implement that there's no point in discussing it. I'd thought it was a general change in policy that was done after Columbine; but evidently not--the switch from "barricaded suspect" mentality to "active shooter" strategy when warranted. Apparently, police departments either don't talk to each other or don't learn from the lessons of other departments.

Clearly what happens at one location has no bearing on what happens at another location, no matter how similar they are in layout and circumstances; so what worked in one active shooter situation won't work in another active shooter situation, right? (Wrong) No: the tactics used for a barricaded suspect are in fact radically different from an active shooter, regardless of whether it's in mall or in a school. Likewise, restricted access can reduce incidents of mass shootings, whether the shooter is intent on taking down a school or a theater.

But as long as we insist on treating these as unavoidable, isolated incidents perpetrated by unidentifiable madmen out of the blue, which must each be treated as unique events, they'll continue to happen. [shrug] And as long as people insist on looking for the cure in legal solutions instead of ALSO tactical or strategic solutions, they'll continue to happen. Waiting for laws to work alone won't cut it here.
 
2012-12-15 02:46:39 AM

COMALite J: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: COMALite J: if_i_really_have_to: COMALite J: • Fact: Prior to the invention of SSRIs, multiple-random-victim premeditated school killings (regardless of weapon type: note I did not limit it to just ‶shootings") happened on average about once per decade. Multiple-random-victim premeditated killings regardless of where they took place (schools or otherwise) were not much more common.

babble

FACT Maybe there's just something really, really wrong with America.

FACT Maybe the sociopathically self-obsessed and self-interested culture fostered by the "Me Generation" started in the late 70s hasn't worked out that well for you.

more babble


FACT?

[Inigo Montoya image 400x346]

Just so you know, the ‶FACT?" points you were responding to were posted by if_i_really_have_to, not me. I merely quoted them in my Reply back to him/her.


To All:

Since I jabbed the extreme right wing with my last post, here′s one for the extremist left-winger gun grabbers: why are you now so sure that banning guns outright can actually happen, when many of you are the same people who say (and I agree, by the way) that Prohibition Does Not Work, that it did not work for alcohol and will not work for cannabis either and cannot be made to work?

What makes cannabis (or alcohol, for that matter) different from guns in this regard? Keep in mind that there is no spelled-out Constitutional Right to either cannabis nor alcohol, but there is for guns.



Who and where are all these people calling for a ban on all guns and the criminalization of gun owners?

Why can't we consider SOME REASONABLE LIMITS ON FIREPOWER AND THE SANITY OF THOSE WHO HAVE ACCESS TO IT?
 
2012-12-15 02:46:57 AM

davidphogan: COMALite J: Thanks. So, as I thought, does not distinguish whether the shooter knew and had some actual grievance against the victims, gang violence, etc. and the sort of thing I′ve been talking about being caused by hypermania and linked to SSRIs, namely, premeditated multiple-random-victim mass killings.

That would mean gang violence has dropped a ton. At the same time, it wasn't unheard of just a few decades back for pregnant women to smoke, drink and even take "diet pills" (aka speed). So, maybe we replaced one cause of problems for another.

That or, since the number of deaths an incidents has stayed flat while the population has grown a lot, this is actually no more of a problem (or even less of a problem) than it ever was before, but because we didn't have a 24 hour news cycle with live feeds from anywhere in the country it didn't feel like a problem until the mid to late 90's when every one of these incidents became a live national tragedy.


No, it wouldn′t. The sort of incidents I′m talking about are, even now, a very small percentage of the total number of mass killings / shootings.

Gang violence accounts for over 94% of all U.S. gun deaths, last I heard. Eliminate them from the stats and the USA drops far down the per capita gun homicides ranking (as it is, we′re nowhere near #1 ― more like #80 according to the UN, and #14 according to NationMaster which has far fewer nations in total on its list).


vrax: Oooh, I like that road to single payer!


Thanks! To add to that, tell them they have 90 days to come up with a bill passed by both Houses that would implement one or the other, or else the offer to settle for one or the other would be rescinded and the Administration and Democratic Party would settle for nothing less than both!

This would also set the NRA and gun lobbies, and the medical insurance and Big Pharma lobbies, at each other′s throats, further dividing and weakening the GOP that they′re among the main supporters of.
 
2012-12-15 02:51:08 AM

drewogatory: A firearm is not something someone can just whip-up. Actually, it is. Very,very common to find simple homemade submachine guns in certain countries where manufactured guns are too expensive/difficult to acquire. A simple google search of "Homemade" or "expedient" firearms would reveal just how easy they are to make. The cat is well and truly out of the bag technology wise.


And except for some simple sing-shot guns, most of those "homemade" guns are made with gun parts, parts that have to be machined. So, sure, you can just whip up a semi-automatic firearm or even a fully automatic one with ready made parts, but you can not just whip-up those parts. Hades, go to an auto junk yard and you can just "whip up" a car. But try to just "whip up" an engine block from base materials.
 
2012-12-15 02:52:23 AM
* single shot
 
2012-12-15 02:58:17 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: For once, I'd like some pro-gun person to come out and say what MUST be part of their thinking, namely, that:

"Today's school murder and the statistically high rates of gun-related deaths in the USA are an unfortunate but worthwhile price to pay for X."

Where they then name that X, be it keeping the king of england of their backs or whatever they imagine it to be.


http://www.theonion.com/articles/right-to-own-handheld-device-that-sh o ots-deadly-me,30742/
 
2012-12-15 03:00:32 AM
Can't all these psychos just kill themselves and leave others out of it.

If hell or something similar does exist, these kind of people deserve to suffer for an eternity.

I heard some people using this story as a way to claim guns should be made illegal, but psychos and criminals don't really follow laws and would just get a weapon illegally, and it would lower the chances of the common citizen to be able to defend themselves.
 
2012-12-15 03:11:43 AM

Bomb Head Mohammed: For once, I'd like some pro-gun person to come out and say what MUST be part of their thinking, namely, that:

"Today's school murder and the statistically high rates of gun-related deaths in the USA are an unfortunate but worthwhile price to pay for X."

Where they then name that X, be it keeping the king of england of their backs or whatever they imagine it to be.


According to the Bureau of Justice, firearms are used to prevent over 100,000 crimes every year. Just over 10,000 people each year are murdered with firearms.

And where is your moral outrage over alcohol? Hmm? How many people are killed each year by drunk drivers? According to the CDC the number is roughly 40,000 each year. I am not sure how many are victims and not the drunk driver, but even if it is 1/4 that is still roughly the same number as are murdered by firearms. At the very least alcohol is just as "evil" as firearms. But are you an other like minded people calling for a ban on alcohol? Unless the answer is Yes then you are nothing but a hypocrite.
 
2012-12-15 03:13:46 AM
.

JRoo: Why can't we consider SOME REASONABLE LIMITS ON FIREPOWER AND THE SANITY OF THOSE WHO HAVE ACCESS TO IT?


Such as?
 
2012-12-15 03:14:43 AM

iq_in_binary: whatshisname: iq_in_binary: If you don't know enough about the subject to even know the difference between a Garand and an M1A, you have no business writing legislation about guns. None.

Yeah, it's an entirely technical discussion. Has nothing to do with anything but the physical characteristics of military-grade hardware.

Military grade hardware is not available to the average citizen in the US. What few citizens do have military hardware are either active military or have been through a rather extensive tax stamp process that includes forfeiture of their 4th amendment rights for inspection at any time. That pool of firearms has the distinction of never having been used in crimes since their inclusion to the NFA. Not one, not a single one. Zip, Zilch, Zero, Nada.


So having said that, how does that affect the 2nd Amendment, given that it was put in the Constitution in order to ensure that we could overthrow a tyranical government?? Obviously, if none of the citizens are able to use military grade weapons, it's going to be impossible to overthrow the government using those arms you have a right to bear. Since the 2nd Amendment is nullified by reality, and is only serving to allow every farktard who wants to blow shiat up to have something to blow it (or them) up with, it needs to be removed, and meaningful gun control put in place. Get rid of handguns. Their only purpose is to kill people. It's not legal to kill people, so let's get rid of handguns. Same with semi-automatic weapons and submachine guns. No need for them in modern-day America.

It's time.
 
2012-12-15 03:21:56 AM

Mock26: .JRoo: Why can't we consider SOME REASONABLE LIMITS ON FIREPOWER AND THE SANITY OF THOSE WHO HAVE ACCESS TO IT?

Such as?


I don't know. Can't hunters and city folk agree on how many handguns and how much automatic bullet fire is necessary?
 
2012-12-15 03:24:17 AM

Gyrfalcon: Well, that's part of the change in mindset that I was talking about earlier that everyone seems to think is just so impossible to implement that there's no point in discussing it. I'd thought it was a general change in policy that was done after Columbine; but evidently not--the switch from "barricaded suspect" mentality to "active shooter" strategy when warranted. Apparently, police departments either don't talk to each other or don't learn from the lessons of other departments.

Clearly what happens at one location has no bearing on what happens at another location, no matter how similar they are in layout and circumstances; so what worked in one active shooter situation won't work in another active shooter situation, right? (Wrong) No: the tactics used for a barricaded suspect are in fact radically different from an active shooter, regardless of whether it's in mall or in a school. Likewise, restricted access can reduce incidents of mass shootings, whether the shooter is intent on taking down a school or a theater.

But as long as we insist on treating these as unavoidable, isolated incidents perpetrated by unidentifiable madmen out of the blue, which must each be treated as unique events, they'll continue to happen. [shrug] And as long as people insist on looking for the cure in legal solutions instead of ALSO tactical or strategic solutions, they'll continue to happen. Waiting for laws to work alone won't cut it here.


I agree completely, but I'll also point out that the active shooter strategy may have been more effective in the Oregon situation because CTC is between an Interstate, a major local road (SE 82nd) and near the end of the Milwaukie Expressway. There's also a hospital across the street from I-205, and there are often police at hospitals. It's also about a 30 second drive from the Clackamas County Sheriffs North Office and training facility. Having an immediate police presence I'm sure was a factor.

COMALite J: No, it wouldn′t. The sort of incidents I′m talking about are, even now, a very small percentage of the total number of mass killings / shootings.

Gang violence accounts for over 94% of all U.S. gun deaths, last I heard. Eliminate them from the stats and the USA drops far down the per capita gun homicides ranking (as it is, we′re nowhere near #1 ― more like #80 according to the UN, and #14 according to NationMaster which has far fewer nations in total on its list).


The number of shootings involving 4 people or more killed at a time has stayed a near flat average while the population has grown significantly. That, to me, indicates that mass shootings have probably happened the entire time, we just hear more about the recent ones. Before the Clackamas Town Center shooting would have been a local event with a next day life cycle on the evening news and on page A-6. Now it's the top story on every web site we look at, and every station you turn on.

Howard Unruh, 1949. He just wandered the neighborhood, and killed 13 (and wounded 3). He even took a call from a reporter before being arrested peacefully. 28 years old, and he was the first documented spree killer.

Definitely by the 80's it started to happen more often, but it's been part of our society (and others) to some degree or another for a long time.
 
2012-12-15 03:26:19 AM

COMALite J: What makes cannabis (or alcohol, for that matter) different from guns in this regard? Keep in mind that there is no spelled-out Constitutional Right to either cannabis nor alcohol, but there is for guns.


There is no spelled our right in the Constitution for a lot of things, such as the right to privacy. What's your point.
 
2012-12-15 03:36:35 AM
At this point in time information is coming in fast and we understand that you may want to link to a Facebook page or other information about the shooter.  Please try to refrain from doing so.  It is personal information, and it may link to innocent people unrelated to this tragedy.  Thank you for your consideration. 
 
2012-12-15 03:39:26 AM

studebaker hoch: In other news, approximately 90 people will have died on our roadways today in motor vehicle accidents.


In other news, approximately 0 people will have died today due to gunshot injuries in quite a few nations with strict gun control laws.

Of course, they don't have big issues to deal with like you do.

Supply-side Jebus, negroes, zombies, THE BRITISH, etc etc.

Hmm, how about you morans stop treating the Second Amendment like a holy writ and instead view it as something that was relatively relevant in SEVENTEEN FARKING NINETY ONE for a bunch of relatively well-off fellows who had just pulled off the world's biggest tax evasion stunt and were somewhat concerned about the future consequences.

In today's world, your sad little home defence armories aren't going to keep you tyrant-free, no matter the NRA jizz-fantasies you may indulge in.
 
2012-12-15 03:41:31 AM

COMALite J: vrax: Oooh, I like that road to single payer!

Thanks! To add to that, tell them they have 90 days to come up with a bill passed by both Houses that would implement one or the other, or else the offer to settle for one or the other would be rescinded and the Administration and Democratic Party would settle for nothing less than both!

This would also set the NRA and gun lobbies, and the medical insurance and Big Pharma lobbies, at each other′s throats, further dividing and weakening the GOP that they′re among the main supporters of.


Damn, it's almost like raping the GOP. Fortunately for them, if it's real rape their body can shut that down. It's like a legislative rape filibuster.
 
2012-12-15 03:48:55 AM
Sooo I ran the picture of "Adam Lanza" through Google Image search and this was the result

i.imgur.com

/looks like Osama didn't die, or Adam played host to Osama's desires of wreaking havoc.
 
2012-12-15 03:49:14 AM

Mikey1969: IN THE SERIES OF ATTACKS AT SCHOOLS IN CHINA, 21 PEOPLE HAVE DIED AND 90 HAVE BEEN INJURED. TODAY'S ATTACK ADDED 22 INJURIES TO THAT NUMBER, BUT NO MORE DEATHS ON TOP OF THE 21 THAT I HAVE MENTIONED HAPPENED IN THE PREVIOUS ATTACKS.


...which is six fewer deaths than ONE attack on a school here.
 
2012-12-15 03:55:38 AM

IlGreven: Mikey1969: IN THE SERIES OF ATTACKS AT SCHOOLS IN CHINA, 21 PEOPLE HAVE DIED AND 90 HAVE BEEN INJURED. TODAY'S ATTACK ADDED 22 INJURIES TO THAT NUMBER, BUT NO MORE DEATHS ON TOP OF THE 21 THAT I HAVE MENTIONED HAPPENED IN THE PREVIOUS ATTACKS.

...which is six fewer deaths than ONE attack on a school here.

And that's terrible.

Don't ask why my brain thought of that.
 
2012-12-15 03:55:44 AM

davidphogan: The number of shootings involving 4 people or more killed at a time has stayed a near flat average while the population has grown significantly. That, to me, indicates that mass shootings have probably happened the entire time, we just hear more about the recent ones. Before the Clackamas Town Center shooting would have been a local event with a next day life cycle on the evening news and on page A-6. Now it's the top story on every web site we look at, and every station you turn on.

Howard Unruh, 1949. He just wandered the neighborhood, and killed 13 (and wounded 3). He even took a call from a reporter before being arrested peacefully. 28 years old, and he was the first documented spree killer.

Definitely by the 80's it started to happen more often, but it's been part of our society (and others) to some degree or another for a long time.


Well, certainly as long as there have been weapons which would allow them. I doubt there were mass shootings when we had nothing but muzzle-loading matchlock muskets, for instance.

You may be putting the cart alongside the horse, though. Fast response time tends to indicate large police presence--which tends to indicate large population, which equals large enough numbers of people that a mass shooting can occur. Obviously you won't have rapid response time in a widely disbursed rural area, which is unlikely to have large gatherings of people that would attract a shooter who would kill more than four or five people at a time.

I tend to agree that the media has a LOT to do with the "increase" in mass shooting incidents; the copycat effect, plus the echo chamber effect, whereby any incident where more than two people get shot suddenly gets reported as a "mass shooting" in the days following a tragedy like this one, regardless of the circumstances. Earlier today, I referenced a shooting here in L.A. that occurred after the Aurora shootings that was breathlessly reported as a "mass shooting" when what it was was a no less tragic family homicide involving six family members--appalling and numerous, but NOT the same category as the Aurora killings. Then again, it's highly likely that this poor idiot today was motivated by the Clackamas killings, or even the Aurora killings earlier this year, they were certainly all over the place--he had his own personal grievances and his own personal demons and figured he'd get his own personal 15 minutes of infamy.

If there was some way to create and enforce a prior restraint order on the media to prevent them from spraying this crap all over the airwaves when it happened, I wonder if we'd see fewer "mass shootings" per annum.
 
2012-12-15 04:01:43 AM
Sad thing is, not one of you sad neckbeards would actually have the stones to stand in front of one of the mothers who lost a child today and spout your .

Not one.

'Yeah, I'm sorry your five year-old daughter had half her face blown off and died of brain trauma but you know, someone with a knife could have done that so don't you dare try and take my guns away.'

'Yeah, I'm sorry your seven year-old son bled out while sobbing but you know, we all gotta have free access to guns because like the Founding Fathers would say, you gotta keep the gubmint and its attack helicopters in line.'

'Yeah, I'm sorry your eight year-old daughter was pulled screaming from under a desk and shot to death but you know, we all need to be able to own guns because FREEDOM.'

'Yeah, I'm sorry your seven year-old daughter and your six year old son were caught in a hail of bullets but you know it wasn't a gun that killed them because guns don't kill people, people do.'

'Yeah, I'm sorry your nine year-old daughter died in extreme agony from a gut wound but you know around a hundred people died in car accidents today AND I DON'T SEE YOU CRYING FOR THEM LADY.'

Harsh?

That's what you people are doing right now.

Right now, and you will continue doing it tomorrow.

All because of fairy stories you were told as children, fairy stories that coincidentally form one of the major political issues in your nation that both parties can easily milk to get you idiots jumping through hoops.

The domestic firearms industry thanks you yet again for your diligent support and urges you to purchase more killtoys in this time of obviously increasing social disharmony.
 
2012-12-15 04:08:42 AM

RealFarknMcCoy2: iq_in_binary: whatshisname: iq_in_binary: If you don't know enough about the subject to even know the difference between a Garand and an M1A, you have no business writing legislation about guns. None.

Yeah, it's an entirely technical discussion. Has nothing to do with anything but the physical characteristics of military-grade hardware.

Military grade hardware is not available to the average citizen in the US. What few citizens do have military hardware are either active military or have been through a rather extensive tax stamp process that includes forfeiture of their 4th amendment rights for inspection at any time. That pool of firearms has the distinction of never having been used in crimes since their inclusion to the NFA. Not one, not a single one. Zip, Zilch, Zero, Nada.

So having said that, how does that affect the 2nd Amendment, given that it was put in the Constitution in order to ensure that we could overthrow a tyranical government?? Obviously, if none of the citizens are able to use military grade weapons, it's going to be impossible to overthrow the government using those arms you have a right to bear. Since the 2nd Amendment is nullified by reality, and is only serving to allow every farktard who wants to blow shiat up to have something to blow it (or them) up with, it needs to be removed, and meaningful gun control put in place. Get rid of handguns. Their only purpose is to kill people. It's not legal to kill people, so let's get rid of handguns. Same with semi-automatic weapons and submachine guns. No need for them in modern-day America.

It's time.


I found these would-be killers during a quick perusal of Wikipedia's Gun Politics in Australia page.

Also found quite a few people who are just destined to kill someone here after a quick Google search.
 
2012-12-15 04:12:13 AM

Gyrfalcon: If there was some way to create and enforce a prior restraint order on the media to prevent them from spraying this crap all over the airwaves when it happened, I wonder if we'd see fewer "mass shootings" per annum.


Except, as I linked to earlier:

davidphogan: There is one not-so-tiny flaw in all of these theories for the increase in mass shootings. And that is that mass shootings have not increased in number or in overall body count, at least not over the past several decades.

Based on data extracted from official police reports to the FBI, the figure below shows annual incident, offender and victim tallies for gun homicides in which at least four people were murdered. Over the thirty-year time frame, an average of about 20 mass murders have occurred annually in the United States with an average death toll of about 100 per year.


Since 1980 the average number of them and average number of deaths has stayed fairly flat, even though we've added in the ballpark of 30% more people to the country during those 32 years. That means the per capita rate of both incidents and deaths has actually decreased. Yes, we have more of the big incidents, but overall it would indicate that things aren't overall getting significantly worse. We're just hearing a lot more about them.
 
2012-12-15 04:17:58 AM
I honestly think that someone could hose an ICU with lead and you disgusting creatures would not bat an eyelid.

'Oh gosh, there's not been a massive increase in the number of gun-driven spree killings in the last two decades!'

Some of you guys are pretty clearly trending deep into the psychopathy spectrum.
 
2012-12-15 04:20:11 AM

cegorach: I honestly think that someone could hose an ICU with lead and you disgusting creatures would not bat an eyelid.

'Oh gosh, there's not been a massive increase in the number of gun-driven spree killings in the last two decades!'

Some of you guys are pretty clearly trending deep into the psychopathy spectrum.


It called not letting your emotions overwhelm your reason.
 
2012-12-15 04:23:04 AM

IlGreven: Mikey1969: IN THE SERIES OF ATTACKS AT SCHOOLS IN CHINA, 21 PEOPLE HAVE DIED AND 90 HAVE BEEN INJURED. TODAY'S ATTACK ADDED 22 INJURIES TO THAT NUMBER, BUT NO MORE DEATHS ON TOP OF THE 21 THAT I HAVE MENTIONED HAPPENED IN THE PREVIOUS ATTACKS.

...which is six fewer deaths than ONE attack on a school here.


Good Lord you people are dense. You make the average Juggalo look like a 6-time PhD concurrently solving world hunger, cold fusion, FTL travel, and ending war as we know it. If other came down to you people and a bag of hammers, the hammers would whip you at the all-time Jeopardy! championship without having to even remove their price tags.

I've gotten passionate, I've explained things in a way that my 4 year old would understand, I've put things down bit by bit, and none of it does any good, you farkers remain the absolute stupidest people whom I have ever seen. It's a wonder you didn't all die off as kids(or adults) sticking forks in wall outlets to seen what would happen. It's hopeless, I might as well try to explain that the moon is not in fact made of green cheese to Sarah Palin. You probably have to be called in out of the rain so that you don't stare slack-jawed at the sky and end up drowning where you stand.

I hope I was at least clear on how stupid you morons are.
 
2012-12-15 04:29:02 AM

cegorach: I honestly think that someone could hose an ICU with lead and you disgusting creatures would not bat an eyelid.

'Oh gosh, there's not been a massive increase in the number of gun-driven spree killings in the last two decades!'

Some of you guys are pretty clearly trending deep into the psychopathy spectrum.


How about an emergency room? It happened in Buffalo, NY in the mid-late nineties. Not too long before I did some training to get my EMT license someone shot it up trying to finish what had been started earlier. A few innocent bystanders were hit, but if I remember right only two or three people died, so at the time it probably wasn't national news.

Sorry if the data scares you, but shiat like this has happened in the past. It sucks when it happens, but just because we're paying more attention and this was particularly horrific doesn't mean it's suddenly something that has never happened before and never will again if we just do one little thing.

We definitely should try to address why people feel a need to kill large amounts of people as they kill themselves, but if the trend of the data is that we're doing something right over the past three decades we might want to try to figure out what that was as well.
 
2012-12-15 04:29:32 AM

Mikey1969: IlGreven: Mikey1969: IN THE SERIES OF ATTACKS AT SCHOOLS IN CHINA, 21 PEOPLE HAVE DIED AND 90 HAVE BEEN INJURED. TODAY'S ATTACK ADDED 22 INJURIES TO THAT NUMBER, BUT NO MORE DEATHS ON TOP OF THE 21 THAT I HAVE MENTIONED HAPPENED IN THE PREVIOUS ATTACKS.

...which is six fewer deaths than ONE attack on a school here.

Good Lord you people are dense. You make the average Juggalo look like a 6-time PhD concurrently solving world hunger, cold fusion, FTL travel, and ending war as we know it. If other came down to you people and a bag of hammers, the hammers would whip you at the all-time Jeopardy! championship without having to even remove their price tags.

I've gotten passionate, I've explained things in a way that my 4 year old would understand, I've put things down bit by bit, and none of it does any good, you farkers remain the absolute stupidest people whom I have ever seen. It's a wonder you didn't all die off as kids(or adults) sticking forks in wall outlets to seen what would happen. It's hopeless, I might as well try to explain that the moon is not in fact made of green cheese to Sarah Palin. You probably have to be called in out of the rain so that you don't stare slack-jawed at the sky and end up drowning where you stand.

I hope I was at least clear on how stupid you morons are.


You're the idiot trying to justify why guns are good in the face of dozens of dead children.

We're the ones trying to point out that no matter your insane justifications, you seriously give more of a shiat about your ideological fantasies than the lives of children.

You really ought to remember to post that MENSA application one day though.
 
2012-12-15 04:32:20 AM

davidphogan: cegorach: I honestly think that someone could hose an ICU with lead and you disgusting creatures would not bat an eyelid.

'Oh gosh, there's not been a massive increase in the number of gun-driven spree killings in the last two decades!'

Some of you guys are pretty clearly trending deep into the psychopathy spectrum.

How about an emergency room? It happened in Buffalo, NY in the mid-late nineties. Not too long before I did some training to get my EMT license someone shot it up trying to finish what had been started earlier. A few innocent bystanders were hit, but if I remember right only two or three people died, so at the time it probably wasn't national news.

Sorry if the data scares you, but shiat like this has happened in the past. It sucks when it happens, but just because we're paying more attention and this was particularly horrific doesn't mean it's suddenly something that has never happened before and never will again if we just do one little thing.

We definitely should try to address why people feel a need to kill large amounts of people as they kill themselves, but if the trend of the data is that we're doing something right over the past three decades we might want to try to figure out what that was as well.


No, I mean an ICU full of babies.

Dozens of machine-gunned babies.

I doubt it would make a difference as the programming is so strong, thank you Colt Home Defence.

Don't apologise for scaring me with data, all the nations I have lived in don't have that kind of insane shiat to worry about as a regular occurrence.
 
2012-12-15 04:34:18 AM

Fail in Human Form: cegorach: I honestly think that someone could hose an ICU with lead and you disgusting creatures would not bat an eyelid.

'Oh gosh, there's not been a massive increase in the number of gun-driven spree killings in the last two decades!'

Some of you guys are pretty clearly trending deep into the psychopathy spectrum.

It called not letting your emotions overwhelm your reason.


What reason?

THE BRITISH ARE COMING?

FARTBONGO'S BLACK HELICOPTERS?

GANG BANGERS IN DO-RAGS?

There's no reason here. Just brainwashed jackasses.

You go slap one of those crying mothers and warn her not to let her emotions overwhelm her love for FREEDOM.

Go on.
 
2012-12-15 04:37:39 AM

cegorach: You're the idiot trying to justify why guns are good in the face of dozens of dead children.

We're the ones trying to point out that no matter your insane justifications, you seriously give more of a shiat about your ideological fantasies than the lives of children.

You really ought to remember to post that MENSA application one day though.


I'd have to wonder if you give more of a shiat about your idealogical fantasies than the lives of children if you're going to avoid looking at data and facts and paint anyone who disagrees with you as a retarded gun nut. I don't own any guns. I'm a vegetarian, so I don't hunt, and I live in a decent neighborhood so basically other than for target shooting I have no need for owning a gun.

I do enjoy occasionally going target shooting, but I wouldn't really miss it if I couldn't do it. It's just another thing to do with my friends.

I do think there are better approaches, like rethinking our entire approach to mental health care in this country, that would do a heluva lot more than banning either all guns or a subset of guns.

I'm not looking for a kneejerk reaction to feel better and put a band aid on this bloodbath. I'd rather find a way to address the root causes, while recognizing that the data shows that maybe we've been doing some things right and missed those because we're so busy trying to think of what the next temporary feel good solution will be.
 
2012-12-15 04:39:16 AM

JRoo: Mock26: .JRoo: Why can't we consider SOME REASONABLE LIMITS ON FIREPOWER AND THE SANITY OF THOSE WHO HAVE ACCESS TO IT?

Such as?

I don't know. Can't hunters and city folk agree on how many handguns and how much automatic bullet fire is necessary?


Please do not take this the wrong way, but you really do not know much about guns, do you? No one hunts with "automatic bullet fire." Fully automatic firearms are heavily regulated and controlled in this country. If I remember correctly there are only about 100,000 that are legally owned by civilians, and to date only one of them has ever been used in a crime (since they were regulated, that is). What this guy was using were semi-automatic handguns, which means that one bullet is fired with each pull of the trigger. If you squeeze the trigger and hold it down only one bullet fires. Another cannot fire until you release the trigger and squeeze again. All those "assault rifles" that you keep hearing about in the news are semi-automatic firearms. They are not the same guns as used by the military. A semi-automatic assault rifle is basically the same as any semi-automatic hunting rifle. The only difference is one of cosmetics and possibly performance (as in it may have reduced recoil, be lighter, have a better gas-feed system, etc.), and none of those possible performance differences will make the gun any more deadlier.

As for the number of handguns, why is that an issue? This guy more than likely would have had the same body count with one handgun as he would have had with two.
 
2012-12-15 04:40:19 AM

cegorach: No, I mean an ICU full of babies.

Dozens of machine-gunned babies.


I'm glad someone from Australia can tell me why we should ban guns here because of a worst case scenario that's incredibly likely to ever happen. Do you have any clue what it takes to get a machine gun in the US?
 
2012-12-15 04:40:59 AM
I wonder if the killer ever took this quiz?
 
2012-12-15 04:43:39 AM

Clutch2013: RealFarknMcCoy2: iq_in_binary: whatshisname: iq_in_binary: If you don't know enough about the subject to even know the difference between a Garand and an M1A, you have no business writing legislation about guns. None.

Yeah, it's an entirely technical discussion. Has nothing to do with anything but the physical characteristics of military-grade hardware.

Military grade hardware is not available to the average citizen in the US. What few citizens do have military hardware are either active military or have been through a rather extensive tax stamp process that includes forfeiture of their 4th amendment rights for inspection at any time. That pool of firearms has the distinction of never having been used in crimes since their inclusion to the NFA. Not one, not a single one. Zip, Zilch, Zero, Nada.

So having said that, how does that affect the 2nd Amendment, given that it was put in the Constitution in order to ensure that we could overthrow a tyranical government?? Obviously, if none of the citizens are able to use military grade weapons, it's going to be impossible to overthrow the government using those arms you have a right to bear. Since the 2nd Amendment is nullified by reality, and is only serving to allow every farktard who wants to blow shiat up to have something to blow it (or them) up with, it needs to be removed, and meaningful gun control put in place. Get rid of handguns. Their only purpose is to kill people. It's not legal to kill people, so let's get rid of handguns. Same with semi-automatic weapons and submachine guns. No need for them in modern-day America.

It's time.

I found these would-be killers during a quick perusal of Wikipedia's Gun Politics in Australia page.

Also found quite a few people who are just destined to kill someone here after a quick Google search.


Do you know the difference between a target pistol and a handgun? I thought not....
 
Displayed 50 of 2792 comments

First | « | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report