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.

(Rochester Democrat and Chronicle)   Shooter of Webster NY Firemen identified, it was a 62 year old white male previously jailed for beating his grandmother to death with a hammer. Pro and anti hammer comments to the right   (democratandchronicle.com) divider line 355
    More: Followup, white male, hammers, volunteer firefighters, grandmother, Rose Spengler  
•       •       •

5688 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Dec 2012 at 6:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-12-24 03:05:32 PM
It's good that we have guns to keep people like that away from hammers.
 
2012-12-24 03:08:16 PM
In later statements to police, Spengler admitted he'd hit his legally blind grandmother several times with the handle of a hammer during a violent argument over her going into the basement, where he'd warned her not to go for her own safety.

Nice. Out of concern for her safety, he kills her. On the positive side, I imagine he could explain the drug laws to us.

And I blame that old "If I had a Hammer" song. It was only a matter of time.
 
2012-12-24 03:16:30 PM
Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.
 
2012-12-24 03:17:56 PM
Every school needs to be protected by a licensed carpenter.

Or, you know, Jesus - he was a carpenter, right?
 
2012-12-24 03:30:09 PM
I'll bet that left a bad impression
 
2012-12-24 03:30:31 PM
Hammer don't hurt em.

/obligatory
 
2012-12-24 03:36:30 PM
RsTFA

So....is he in custody?  Dead?  WTF?
 
2012-12-24 03:43:20 PM
When all you have is a hammer...
 
2012-12-24 03:43:24 PM
i236.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 03:54:22 PM
He beat his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Why wasn't he still in prison?
 
2012-12-24 03:55:19 PM
i49.tinypic.com
 
2012-12-24 03:55:56 PM
Apparently, his grandmother tried to touch it.
 
2012-12-24 03:56:57 PM

Diogenes: RsTFA

So....is he in custody?  Dead?  WTF?


I read in another article that he's is dead. Probably from his guns hammer.
 
2012-12-24 03:57:02 PM

Coco LaFemme: Why wasn't he still in prison?


Obviously he was rehabilitated. Duh!
 
2012-12-24 03:57:19 PM

St_Francis_P: In later statements to police, Spengler admitted he'd hit his legally blind grandmother several times with the handle of a hammer during a violent argument over her going into the basement, where he'd warned her not to go for her own safety.

Nice. Out of concern for her safety, he kills her. On the positive side, I imagine he could explain the drug laws to us.

And I blame that old "If I had a Hammer" song. It was only a matter of time.


Dammit, thanks for the earworm.
 
2012-12-24 03:57:29 PM
It's hammer
Ow! Hammer
Grandma's hammer
Claw hammer
now granny's gone away.
 
2012-12-24 04:00:23 PM
She is lucky for not going into the basement, bad things happen down here there.

/slashies!
 
2012-12-24 04:03:21 PM
And what law-abiding citizen did he get his gun from?
 
2012-12-24 04:11:46 PM
I'm sure his grandmother was just an actress, it's quite obvious he only did this to further the agenda of the rand corporation and reverse vampires.
 
2012-12-24 04:11:57 PM

Diogenes: RsTFA

So....is he in custody?  Dead?  WTF?


Self inflicted gunshot wound to the head

//should have gotten the death penalty after he beat his grandmother to death
 
2012-12-24 04:19:19 PM
AlwaysRightBoy &  cretinbob: Thanks.  I could have found it if I looked.  Just seemed like a good detail for this article to carry.

No loss to the world there, to be sure.
 
2012-12-24 04:19:38 PM

Jon H: She is lucky for not going into the basement, bad things happen down here there.

/slashies!


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-24 04:45:18 PM
b.vimeocdn.com
 
2012-12-24 04:45:49 PM
Was his name Maxwell?
 
2012-12-24 05:00:14 PM
He should have never got out of rape central.
 
2012-12-24 05:07:54 PM
I'm trying to work out a nail gun joke but nothing's gelling.


Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Apparently, his grandmother tried to touch it.


And by "hammer" you mean "penis", right?
 
2012-12-24 05:09:16 PM

GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.


Yeah, I'm sure he bought it - all nice and legal.


msnbcmedia.msn.com
 
2012-12-24 05:10:53 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

But video games don't cause violence.  Got it.
 
2012-12-24 05:18:43 PM
Should have stuck a needle in his arm the first go round.
 
2012-12-24 05:23:01 PM

Coco LaFemme: He beat his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Why wasn't he still in prison?


They have to make room for all the people busted with a few ounces of pot.
 
2012-12-24 05:23:39 PM

Mike_LowELL: [upload.wikimedia.org image 200x175]

But video games don't cause violence.  Got it.


Nice.
 
2012-12-24 05:29:40 PM
www.littleblackstar.com

the right to bear hammer-hands
 
2012-12-24 05:35:43 PM
How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?
 
2012-12-24 05:41:09 PM

Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?


I don't get this either.  It's something we've always done as a culture - hell, since Cain killed Abel we've known whodunit.  We only glorify the fallen if they're important enough to.
 
2012-12-24 05:58:25 PM
I just want to say I am pro-hammer.

/but anti-skub
 
2012-12-24 06:16:03 PM
what about nails?
 
2012-12-24 06:16:46 PM

Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?


The notoriety they get to fap to after they're dead? That notoriety?
 
2012-12-24 06:29:45 PM
When I first got on we carried bullet-proof vests. They were out of dates ones shiat canned by PD. I never put one on and can't say I ever saw anyone put one on. We've changed our staging policy now and usually won't go in until PD clears the scene. Of course, there generally isn't a reason to stage if you're the first on engine or truck to a reported structure fire
 
2012-12-24 06:30:01 PM

munko: what about nails?


He's not really available for comment right now:

i47.tinypic.com
 
2012-12-24 06:30:23 PM

Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?


What makes you think they did it for fame?

Ever heard of this thing called anger?
 
2012-12-24 06:31:35 PM
library.thinkquest.org

is unamused.
 
2012-12-24 06:31:40 PM
jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com

/hot, like a fire
 
2012-12-24 06:31:56 PM

Diogenes: RsTFA

So....is he in custody?  Dead?  WTF?


FTFA, 3d paragraph:Police found William H. Spengler Jr. dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head around 11 a.m. Tuesday near 191 Lake Road, the home where he had lit a fire then set the deadly trap for first responders.

Killed himself at the scene.
 
2012-12-24 06:32:27 PM
Police found William H. Spengler Jr. dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head around 11 a.m. Tuesday near 191 Lake Road, the home where he had lit a fire then set the deadly trap for first responders.

Are we channeling from the future?

/i have relatives in that area
 
2012-12-24 06:32:56 PM
Too many guns.
 
2012-12-24 06:33:11 PM
relevant

web.donga.ac.kr
 
2012-12-24 06:33:59 PM
Debate will rage... massacres will continue
 
2012-12-24 06:34:23 PM
My thoughts about hammer control remain unchanged in the wake of this disaster.

/ouch the stones! they hurt!
 
2012-12-24 06:35:49 PM

NewportBarGuy: Coco LaFemme: Why wasn't he still in prison?

Obviously he was rehabilitated. Duh!


Prison FTW!
 
2012-12-24 06:36:29 PM

Mike_LowELL: [upload.wikimedia.org image 200x175]

But video games don't cause violence.  Got it.


If they did, I'd have been jailed long ago for jumping on turtles and throwing them at people.
 
2012-12-24 06:37:08 PM

SarahDiddle: I just want to say I am pro-hammer.

/but anti-skub


THEM'S FIGHTIN' WORDS, BOY!!!

i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-24 06:37:11 PM

GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.


Except it was illegal for him to own the gun.
 
2012-12-24 06:37:19 PM
It was that frigging Thor movie.
 
2012-12-24 06:38:29 PM
I live about 2 miles away where this happened. I don't know if they located his sister yet, but she is probably in one of the houses that burned down. There was a row of houses that were delapidated or boarded up. They sat on multi million dollar property. I thought that it was arson at first.
 
2012-12-24 06:39:31 PM

fusillade762: I'm trying to work out a nail gun joke but nothing's gelling.


Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Apparently, his grandmother tried to touch it.

And by "hammer" you mean "penis", right?


It's like having a thousand hammers when all you need is a nail gun.

I'm still waiting to follow the worms.
 
2012-12-24 06:39:36 PM
It's ok. Just tell the families of the fire fighters that a gun didn't kill their loved one. I'm sure they'll understand and have a totally awesome Christmas planning a funeral.
 
2012-12-24 06:39:49 PM

gwenners: [jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com image 265x400]

/hot, like a fire


If that guy his his grandmother to death with his "hammer" then I'm just impressed.
 
2012-12-24 06:40:23 PM

St_Francis_P: In later statements to police, Spengler admitted he'd hit his legally blind grandmother several times with the handle of a hammer during a violent argument over her going into the basement, where he'd warned her not to go for her own safety.

Nice. Out of concern for her safety, he kills her. On the positive side, I imagine he could explain the drug laws to us.

And I blame that old "If I had a Hammer" song. It was only a matter of time.


That's probably why he was shooting at the firemen, only out of concern of their safety.
 
2012-12-24 06:41:29 PM
Take action toward putting to a vote in 2014 a constitutional amendment revoking the Second Amendment. http://wh.gov/QXYb
 
2012-12-24 06:41:46 PM

sno man: Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?

The notoriety they get to fap to after they're dead? That notoriety?


It's more like a motivating factor. Some people want a gravestone to be remembered... Some people want something different. Crazy guy gets his need to be remembered fulfilled by asshole media who profits waving bloody rags
 
2012-12-24 06:41:55 PM
He was clearly a video game nut.
 
2012-12-24 06:42:26 PM
Spengler pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 1981 and was sentenced to 8 1/3 to 25 years in prison.

During a news conference Tuesday afternoon, Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley said Spengler was released from prison in 1998 and was under parole supervision until 2006.


He lived at the house with his sister (who is missing at the moment).

In before she gets blamed for all this.
 
2012-12-24 06:42:54 PM
Beyond all the rhetoric and flamewars, a bit of further reading on why this guy was out of prison suggests he was originally charged with 2nd degree murder but pleaded out as manslaughter (wasn't a planned thing apparently). He got an appropriate sentence, behaved himself well enough in prison to get paroled, didn't reoffend during his parole period, which ended 6 years ago and has generally kept quietly to himself since he was released. He did his time, which was totally appropriate for the charge he pled, did his parole and lived quietly for the 14 years since his release.

It's not like he was a walking advert for a crazy about to torch the neighbourhood and shoot him some firemen.

What the fark happened to set this off - I really don't understand at all.

/Whether the prosecution and judge should have accepted the plea to a lesser charge is another discussion altogether.
 
2012-12-24 06:43:20 PM
Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny
 
2012-12-24 06:43:41 PM
25.media.tumblr.com

Ein! Zwei! Drei! HAMMA!
 
2012-12-24 06:43:42 PM

shower_in_my_socks: He was clearly a video game nut.


He looks more like a rap music afficianado to me
 
2012-12-24 06:45:31 PM

Elandriel: When all you have is a hammer...


Every grandmother looks like a nail?

// How do you not get life without parole for that shiat?
 
2012-12-24 06:45:37 PM

stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny


Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.
 
2012-12-24 06:48:03 PM
2.bp.blogspot.com


/outlaw skub and only outlaws will have skub
 
2012-12-24 06:48:17 PM
The scourge of high capacity assault hammers
 
2012-12-24 06:48:42 PM
What are the chances this was a "self inflicted" gunshot wound?
 
2012-12-24 06:49:23 PM

BMFPitt: Elandriel: When all you have is a hammer...

Every grandmother looks like a nail?


They look more like Q-tips to me. But then, I don't have any hammers, just earwax.
 
2012-12-24 06:49:57 PM
he had struck her in the head multiple times during an argument about her going into the basement that started because he was worried that she'd hurt herself down there.

That's batshait crazy.
 
2012-12-24 06:51:02 PM

BMFPitt: Elandriel: When all you have is a hammer...

Every grandmother looks like a nail?

// How do you not get life without parole for that shiat?


Especially when this is how it all happened....


Initially, Spengler told family members that he had found his grandmother's body at the bottom of her basement stairs, where he said she had landed after an accidental fall.

But, an autopsy revealed she had been beaten to death.

He later confessed to police that he had struck her in the head multiple times during an argument about her going into the basement that started because he was worried that she'd hurt herself down there. He then staged her body on the stairs and threw the hammer in Lake Ontario


no warning signs there
 
2012-12-24 06:51:26 PM
Between the schools and now the firemen that the Federal government will have to protect with armed security guards, this nation will be flat broke. On the other hand the gunmakers will all have record profits in the year ending 2013!
 
2012-12-24 06:51:31 PM

Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?


I doubt that it's really a motivating factor. I mean, can you cite any evidence of this?

Most of these shooters have a mental illness or are driven by extreme paranoid beliefs.
 
2012-12-24 06:52:21 PM
th251.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 06:52:24 PM
it was a 62 year old white male previously jailed for beating his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Reminds me of this guy. Alan Shore must have gotten him out of jail.
 
2012-12-24 06:52:40 PM

stratagos: Every school needs to be protected by a licensed carpenter.

Or, you know, Jesus - he was a carpenter, right?


That's where I was going ... he used a hammer, or whatever passed for one "back then." Therefore, OK.
 
2012-12-24 06:53:48 PM

NewportBarGuy: Coco LaFemme: Why wasn't he still in prison?

Obviously he was rehabilitated. Duh!


Prison in this country is not about rehab. It's about warehousing and slave labor.
 
2012-12-24 06:54:08 PM
Good thing there is a law against felons owning guns otherwise he might have shot someone. Thank heavens the ACLU insists on standards for putting away crazy people like requiring proof they are a danger to themselves or others say like beating a 92 year old to death with a hammer. The legal system works so well lets make more laws. No sense in applying the ones we already have.
 
2012-12-24 06:54:56 PM

Evil Canadian: Beyond all the rhetoric and flamewars, a bit of further reading on why this guy was out of prison suggests he was originally charged with 2nd degree murder but pleaded out as manslaughter (wasn't a planned thing apparently). He got an appropriate sentence, behaved himself well enough in prison to get paroled, didn't reoffend during his parole period, which ended 6 years ago and has generally kept quietly to himself since he was released. He did his time, which was totally appropriate for the charge he pled, did his parole and lived quietly for the 14 years since his release.

It's not like he was a walking advert for a crazy about to torch the neighbourhood and shoot him some firemen.

What the fark happened to set this off - I really don't understand at all.

/Whether the prosecution and judge should have accepted the plea to a lesser charge is another discussion altogether.


With his record, please explain how he was able to acquire one or more firearms.
 
2012-12-24 06:56:47 PM
My creativity is on break, so I'll just go with this.

If a cop with a gun had been there, he would have said, "Stop, Hammertime."

Yep, that's all I got.
 
2012-12-24 06:57:01 PM

skinink: On the other hand the gunmakers will all have record profits in the year ending 2013!


Sure, because everyone's convinced that guns are going to be taken away.

OTOH, there isn't any kind of run on psychiatric help.
 
2012-12-24 06:59:17 PM

Kumana Wanalaia: [25.media.tumblr.com image 510x359]

Ein! Zwei! Drei! HAMMA!


Call the schoolmaster
I always said he'd come to no good
In the end Your Honour
If they'd let me have my way I could
Have flayed him into shape
But my hands were tied
The bleeding hearts and artists
Let him get away with murder
Let me hammer him today
 
2012-12-24 06:59:32 PM
Aren't the anti gun people the same who want to do away with jails and capitol punishment? Had we kept this asshole locked up, fried his ass, he wouldn't have been able to do this.

You can't be a bleeding heart then biatch when shiat like this happens.
 
2012-12-24 06:59:37 PM
tain't eavy auling t'urts t'orses ooves

tis t'ammer on t'ardighway
 
2012-12-24 06:59:41 PM
Since this happened early this morning... I am going to guess he didn't use one of the scary guns since they are not reporting what kind of gun(s) he used.
 
2012-12-24 06:59:43 PM
www.nailgundepot.com

Just what purpose does this serve anyway? These things come with high-capacity magazines and are designed to fire a nail as quickly as the user can pull the trigger; some even have drums. A drum of nails?! Why can't you carpentry nuts understand that a manual hammer-and-nail combo is adequate for your uses, or does shiat like this help stroke your damaged little ego?
 
2012-12-24 07:01:41 PM
He used a hammer first so she wouldn't feel the knife.
He's gone insane. He's lost his mind.
 
2012-12-24 07:01:52 PM

GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.


Felons in NY aren't allowed to own guns. It's why Dog the Bounty Hunter had to bounty hunt with Mace.

So should we add a super duper, we really mean it law on top?
 
2012-12-24 07:02:08 PM
msnbcmedia.msn.com

this is what happens to a bowl cut over time
 
2012-12-24 07:03:23 PM
Thread
Delivers
Jaypeg
 
2012-12-24 07:04:07 PM

FriarReb98: Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?

I don't get this either.  It's something we've always done as a culture - hell, since Cain killed Abel we've known whodunit.  We only glorify the fallen if they're important enough to.


It's an old leftover social urge to know who to avoid like hell.
 
2012-12-24 07:06:25 PM
media.egotvonline.com

Good Christmas/Hanukah/Kwanzaa/Festivus tidings to all you Farkers, be you hammered or abstemious!
 
2012-12-24 07:06:25 PM
Boxing analyst Max Kellerman's brother was beaten to death by a boxer with a hammer nicknamed "the Hammer".

Ironic no?
 
2012-12-24 07:07:59 PM

NewportBarGuy: Coco LaFemme: Why wasn't he still in prison?

Obviously he was rehabilitated. Duh!


I know what you think it means. Me, I think it's a made-up word, a politician's word. A word so young fellas like you can wear a suit and tie and have a job
 
2012-12-24 07:09:58 PM
Actually gotta do work to kill someone with a hammer. Gun's just point and click. Done.
 
2012-12-24 07:10:54 PM

Billybobgeorgebob: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Except it was illegal for him to own the gun.


But that would mean he was willfully breaking the law.
Why would he do that?
 
2012-12-24 07:11:35 PM
"To hammer, or not to hammer, that is the question..."
 
2012-12-24 07:11:37 PM

Amos Quito: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Yeah, I'm sure he bought it - all nice and legal.


The firearms Catch 22: More guns in the hands of the law abiding means more guns in the hands of criminals.
 
2012-12-24 07:11:43 PM
It was probably one of those hi-cap assault hammers. No one needs a 24oz ball peen hammer!
 
2012-12-24 07:12:25 PM
It's Hammer Time!

*cue jpegs and shat*
 
2012-12-24 07:12:30 PM

hbk72777: Aren't the anti gun people the same who want to do away with jails and capitol punishment? Had we kept this asshole locked up, fried his ass, he wouldn't have been able to do this.

You can't be a bleeding heart then biatch when shiat like this happens.


Um, no, almost nobody wants to do away with jails. Wanting to abolish capital punishment (Which is barbaric) doesn't mean we don't want murderers and such locked up. Capital punishment is just the desire for revenge, which should NOT be part of the criminal justice system in any way, shape or form. Plus, far too many innocent people are killed based on faulty evidence. Furthermore the legal costs associated with death row are higher than the costs required to keep a prisoner in jail for life. And if you cut corners to save costs, more innocent people end up dead at the hands of the state.

If right-wing ideology was actually consistent, giving the state power to execute people would be the last thing they'd want. Second to last would be 'making it easier and faster for the state to execute you'.
 
2012-12-24 07:13:12 PM

JungleBoogie: Amos Quito: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Yeah, I'm sure he bought it - all nice and legal.

The firearms Catch 22: More guns in the hands of the law abiding means more guns in the hands of criminals.


Who needs a gun when all you have is a  hammer?
 
2012-12-24 07:13:32 PM

JungleBoogie: Actually gotta do work to kill someone with a hammer. Gun's just point and click. Done.


You don't use hammers like I use hammers.

/you can kill a bull by driving one blow strait to the noggin.
/I'm actually surprised we haven't heard of a mass driving.
 
2012-12-24 07:15:19 PM

JungleBoogie: Amos Quito: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Yeah, I'm sure he bought it - all nice and legal.

The firearms Catch 22: More guns in the hands of the law abiding means more guns in the hands of criminals.


Actually the statistics go the other way.
More guns in the hands of the law abiding means criminals are less willing to confront them. They turn to other Methods, like daylight robbery instead of home invasions.
 
2012-12-24 07:15:35 PM
It was golfing in flames, golfing.
 
2012-12-24 07:18:20 PM
No 'The Wire' references?

Fark, I am disappoint.
 
2012-12-24 07:19:17 PM
In later statements to police, Spengler admitted he'd hit his legally blind grandmother several times with the handle of a hammer during a violent argument over her going into the basement, where he'd warned her not to go for her own safety.

i20.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 07:19:50 PM
i262.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 07:22:44 PM
cinemademerde.com

Also approves.
 
2012-12-24 07:24:41 PM
What I don't get is why these loser always shoot themselves as the police are closing in. If they wanted to 'make a statement', why not use the bully pulpit in court to do so?

/close early...getting hammered on real* eggnog

* - equal parts light and heavy cream with bourbon and rum...and some eggs and nutmeg
 
2012-12-24 07:25:15 PM
Settle down, gun-grabbers.

If he didn't have a gun he would've just used a hammer. Nothing can be done.
 
2012-12-24 07:25:42 PM
media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-24 07:31:02 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Settle down, gun-grabbers.

If he didn't have a gun he would've just used a hammer. Nothing can be done.


Ban semi-automatic butane lighters.
 
2012-12-24 07:32:58 PM
www.wackypackages.org

/Hammers don't kill people, arms do.
 
2012-12-24 07:36:31 PM
My name is Natalie Pushedbyparents, and I just wanted to tell the President that only carpenters and blacksmiths should get hammers. If people want to do it as a sport then they could go to hardware stores and the hammers would not be able to leave there.
 
2012-12-24 07:37:24 PM
cache.gawkerassets.com

/Maybe I'm misunderstanding the headline...
 
2012-12-24 07:40:17 PM
A different article said the POS killed himself after a off duty police officer came to the scene and returned fire.
 
2012-12-24 07:41:09 PM
img.youtube.com
 
2012-12-24 07:42:29 PM
www.cmstatic1.com

Hammers and nails are just plain lazy.
 
2012-12-24 07:43:21 PM

Pray 4 Mojo: [www.cmstatic1.com image 512x384]

Hammers and nails are just plain lazy.


WWJD
 
2012-12-24 07:44:45 PM

way south: Billybobgeorgebob: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Except it was illegal for him to own the gun.

But that would mean he was willfully breaking the law.
Why would he do that?


Obviously we need a law saying that you need to obey the other laws. There is just no way anyone could get around that.
 
2012-12-24 07:49:00 PM
Time to make sure everyone has a hammer to combat the Bad people who use hammers so the good guys with hammers can stop them.

Nails... everything looks like nails
 
2012-12-24 07:49:34 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-24 07:50:29 PM

glassgnost: Take action toward putting to a vote in 2014 a constitutional amendment revoking the Second Amendment. http://wh.gov/QXYb


Knock yourself out. At the end of the day, you've still got a crazy dude who wants to take out firemen by setting a fire as part of a trap for them. Reality is, his use of a gun was probably the least-deadly outcome of any of the other crazy ways he could have done it.
 
2012-12-24 07:53:32 PM

Benjamin Orr: Pray 4 Mojo: [www.cmstatic1.com image 512x384]

Hammers and nails are just plain lazy.

WWJD


Jesus would use a mortise and tenon joint.

Well... that or magic.
 
2012-12-24 07:54:54 PM
If we required licensing and registration of all hammers, this wouldn't have happened.
/problem solved
 
2012-12-24 07:57:08 PM

St_Francis_P: In later statements to police, Spengler admitted he'd hit his legally blind grandmother several times with the handle of a hammer during a violent argument over her going into the basement, where he'd warned her not to go for her own safety.

Nice. Out of concern for her safety, he kills her. On the positive side, I imagine he could explain the drug laws to us.

And I blame that old "If I had a Hammer" song. It was only a matter of time.


When are we gonna finally put a stop to folksy, mellow ballads??
 
2012-12-24 07:58:46 PM
TTL/DNR...don't know if anyone posted this yet...but...

TIME TO PROFILE WHITE MEN
 
2012-12-24 07:59:01 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-24 07:59:13 PM

Cataholic: glassgnost: Take action toward putting to a vote in 2014 a constitutional amendment revoking the Second Amendment. http://wh.gov/QXYb

Knock yourself out. At the end of the day, you've still got a crazy dude who wants to take out firemen by setting a fire as part of a trap for them. Reality is, his use of a gun was probably the least-deadly outcome of any of the other crazy ways he could have done it.


Its an old tactic. Terrorists often set off a small bomb to draw in the clean up crew, then set off the big one to get as many kills as possible.
They don't care for the difference between infantry and worker bees.
This guy was simply too drunk or lazy to make a pipe bomb.
 
2012-12-24 07:59:24 PM

glassgnost: Take action toward putting to a vote in 2014 a constitutional amendment revoking the Second Amendment. http://wh.gov/QXYb

We, the undersigned, do believe that weapons manufacturers, their lobbyists, and affiliated persons have so abused the Second Amendment that in this time, we must strike down the Second Amendment in order to establish and enforce reasonable restraints upon the manufacture, sale, posession and use of firearms.


we also want ponies and cake..... (its possession btw)

SIGNATURES NEEDED BY JANUARY 23, 2013 TO REACH GOAL OF 25,000 24,999

TOTAL SIGNATURES ON THIS PETITION 1
 
2012-12-24 07:59:44 PM

SubBass49: TTL/DNR...don't know if anyone posted this yet...but...

TIME TO PROFILE WHITE MEN


To malletize
 
2012-12-24 08:00:50 PM
this sort of thing is ingrained in our culture, hell we make games out of it for christ's sake

cdn-static.zdnet.com
 
2012-12-24 08:01:04 PM
The only thing of value that I learned from this article is that even those convicted of brutal murder can get their hands on lethal weaponry without so much as a hint of a problem.

The solution, obviously, is MOAR GUNS
 
2012-12-24 08:04:40 PM
media.tumblr.com

Bye.
 
2012-12-24 08:04:44 PM

kombat_unit: stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny

Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.


I wouldn't care if he was executed or not, but you're dishonest to pretend that life without parole is not a (cheaper) option.
 
2012-12-24 08:06:46 PM
You know who else liked hammers?
i44.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 08:09:15 PM
Just before setting the fire, he was alleged to have said, "trust me. I know what I'm doing."

/obscure? on Christmas eve?
 
2012-12-24 08:09:56 PM

Buttbone McGillicutty: You know who else liked hammers?
[i44.photobucket.com image 697x487]


The Dnepropetrovsk maniacs?
 
2012-12-24 08:10:57 PM

Infernalist: The only thing of value that I learned from this article is that even those convicted of brutal murder can get their hands on lethal weaponry without so much as a hint of a problem.

The solution, obviously, is MOAR GUNS


The alternative is to prevent you from buying a gun and pretend that this act disarmed him.

/So you can turn off your alarm system and sleep with the doors unlocked, because the solution to crime is in the bag.
/Even if the elimination of guns was possible, I suspect that a guy who murders his own family member with a hammer will find a way to make do.
 
2012-12-24 08:12:32 PM
It's because we have banned god from our fires
 
2012-12-24 08:13:30 PM

Wayne 985: kombat_unit: stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny

Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.

I wouldn't care if he was executed or not, but you're dishonest to pretend that life without parole is not a (cheaper) option.


The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff).
Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.

/I'm ambivalent on the death penalty but at least make that distinction clear.
/IIRC it has no statistical effect on crime.
 
2012-12-24 08:13:39 PM

way south: Infernalist: The only thing of value that I learned from this article is that even those convicted of brutal murder can get their hands on lethal weaponry without so much as a hint of a problem.

The solution, obviously, is MOAR GUNS

The alternative is to prevent you from buying a gun and pretend that this act disarmed him.

/So you can turn off your alarm system and sleep with the doors unlocked, because the solution to crime is in the bag.
/Even if the elimination of guns was possible, I suspect that a guy who murders his own family member with a hammer will find a way to make do.


I think the question we need to ask is how did he get a gun and what c could have been done to prevent that?
 
2012-12-24 08:13:51 PM

Tillmaster: Evil Canadian: Beyond all the rhetoric and flamewars, a bit of further reading on why this guy was out of prison suggests he was originally charged with 2nd degree murder but pleaded out as manslaughter (wasn't a planned thing apparently). He got an appropriate sentence, behaved himself well enough in prison to get paroled, didn't reoffend during his parole period, which ended 6 years ago and has generally kept quietly to himself since he was released. He did his time, which was totally appropriate for the charge he pled, did his parole and lived quietly for the 14 years since his release.

It's not like he was a walking advert for a crazy about to torch the neighbourhood and shoot him some firemen.

What the fark happened to set this off - I really don't understand at all.

/Whether the prosecution and judge should have accepted the plea to a lesser charge is another discussion altogether.

With his record, please explain how he was able to acquire one or more firearms.


Illegally? But surely that couldn't happen because banning people from obtaining firearms will certainly mean they won't be able to get them. It's worked so well with drugs and alcohol and such.
 
2012-12-24 08:15:03 PM

way south: Wayne 985: kombat_unit: stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny

Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.

I wouldn't care if he was executed or not, but you're dishonest to pretend that life without parole is not a (cheaper) option.

The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff).
Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.

/I'm ambivalent on the death penalty but at least make that distinction clear.
/IIRC it has no statistical effect on crime.


Damn that due process amiright?
 
2012-12-24 08:15:14 PM

L.D. Ablo: [b.vimeocdn.com image 640x432]


Came here for this. Leaving satisfied.

/Ban hammers
 
2012-12-24 08:16:19 PM
from another article.... just wow.....

Spengler lived in the house with his sister and mother, Arline, who died in October. He had originally been charged with second-degree murder in connection with grandmother Rose Spengler's death but pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of manslaughter.

A friend of the gunman, Roger Vercruysse, said Spengler didn't seem violent but hated his sister. Vercruysse said Spengler "loved his mama to death" and that he thinks his friend "went crazy" after she died
.

Link
 
2012-12-24 08:16:28 PM
That is some farked up cheese-whiz.

on a different note: I'm detecting a lack of Oldboy references in a hammer related thread. You're slipping, Fark.
 
2012-12-24 08:16:42 PM
img19.imageshack.us
 
2012-12-24 08:16:43 PM

Mrtraveler01: way south: Infernalist: The only thing of value that I learned from this article is that even those convicted of brutal murder can get their hands on lethal weaponry without so much as a hint of a problem.

The solution, obviously, is MOAR GUNS

The alternative is to prevent you from buying a gun and pretend that this act disarmed him.

/So you can turn off your alarm system and sleep with the doors unlocked, because the solution to crime is in the bag.
/Even if the elimination of guns was possible, I suspect that a guy who murders his own family member with a hammer will find a way to make do.

I think the question we need to ask is how did he get a gun and what c could have been done to prevent that?


Its a fair question.
I'm more curious how he left the corrections system with a serious flaw in his character left uncorrected.

Arguing about the weapon only changes the hypothetical bodycount. The problem is he decided to commit such a crime.
 
2012-12-24 08:18:43 PM
So someone who by law wasn't allowed to have a gun committed a mass shooting again.

Why do gun control advocates think that restricting guns is going to keep people like this from getting guns? He obviously, as a felon, was able to get a weapon. Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.
 
2012-12-24 08:19:44 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: And what law-abiding citizen did he get his gun from?


Silly. He was obviously a member of a very well-regulated militia.
 
2012-12-24 08:20:36 PM
Thank God for the Assault Hammer ban.

www.homeland-security-center.bg

Only the government is allowed to have them.
 
2012-12-24 08:22:27 PM

way south: The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff)...Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.


Not to mention the cost of the innocent lives taken by the State. With a life w/o parole sentence at least you can release someone who is vindicated later.
 
2012-12-24 08:24:06 PM
I don't think I've seen race identified in a fark headline before.
 
2012-12-24 08:24:28 PM
Mjollnir?

*thunder crackles and lightning crashes*
 
2012-12-24 08:24:30 PM

SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.


I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.
 
2012-12-24 08:25:44 PM

Mrtraveler01: way south: Wayne 985: kombat_unit: stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny

Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.

I wouldn't care if he was executed or not, but you're dishonest to pretend that life without parole is not a (cheaper) option.

The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff).
Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.

/I'm ambivalent on the death penalty but at least make that distinction clear.
/IIRC it has no statistical effect on crime.

Damn that due process amiright?


Nothing against the process. But the implication that death is more expensive than life presumes that he simply wont litigate anyway after avoiding the hangman's noose, and that a lower cost is justification for our moral choices.
It doesn't take into account the cost of what happens when he causes trouble in prison.

/or maybe kills or injures another inmate.
/or gets out and kills firemen in an ambush.
/The lawsuit over his wrongful execution would probably have cost less than all the death benefits we'll be paying out.
/Morally incorrect but look at the savings!
 
2012-12-24 08:25:48 PM

pmmal: Just before setting the fire, he was alleged to have said, "trust me. I know what I'm doing."

/obscure? on Christmas eve?


WTF does Bubba Zenetti have to do with it?
 
2012-12-24 08:26:17 PM
God, this story is so effed up. Who has a problem with firefighters, of all people? Christ.
 
2012-12-24 08:26:34 PM

Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.


He got them from his mom.
 
2012-12-24 08:27:11 PM

LordJiro: If right-wing ideology was actually consistent, giving the state power to execute people would be the last thing they'd want. Second to last would be 'making it easier and faster for the state to execute you'.


If the state doesn't have the power to execute people, that power reverts to the people themselves. If left-wing ideology was actually consistent, they'd appreciate giving the State an absolute monopoly on the power to decide who should be killed. If it was *really* consistent, the position "okay, let's give the state exclusive rights to decide who should be killed, but then make the actual number of executions zero" would fly as well as "let's make marijuana a legally regulated pharmaceutical, then set the legally regulated amount to zero".

Granted the system does incarcerate and execute people incorrectly, and that there's an indefensable bias toward executing black men. I've never heard of a murder victim getting due process or a right to appeal though.
 
2012-12-24 08:28:15 PM

Pertifly: God, this story is so effed up. Who has a problem with firefighters, of all people? Christ.


Really killed my Christmas spirit when I heard that story.
 
2012-12-24 08:29:21 PM

Mrtraveler01: Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.

He got them from his mom.


That's the problem with kids these days.
When I was his age we had to work hard and save up for our rampage guns.

/Ok... maybe that's too soon.
 
2012-12-24 08:29:46 PM

Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.


Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.
 
2012-12-24 08:30:28 PM

Mrtraveler01: He got them from his mom.


Exactly. That's my point. She got them legally and trained him on them. That's why I disagree with the person I was responding to.
 
2012-12-24 08:32:40 PM

Somacandra: Mrtraveler01: He got them from his mom.

Exactly. That's my point. She got them legally and trained him on them. That's why I disagree with the person I was responding to.


Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.
 
2012-12-24 08:32:58 PM

Amos Quito: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Yeah, I'm sure he bought it - all nice and legal.


[msnbcmedia.msn.com image 327x380]


I see "gun show loophole" stories in our future. Although, really, very few non-dealers sell at gun shows, because you can't make enough money to make renting the table profitable unless you're a licensed dealer (and the feds really frown on "collectors" who make money from dealing without a license). More likely, he bought it through a classified ad. No paperwork, no background check, no Merry Christmas for the local fire department.
 
2012-12-24 08:33:01 PM

Coco LaFemme: He beat his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Why wasn't he still in prison?


Ditto that - wtf was that parole board thinking?...
 
2012-12-24 08:34:16 PM

Benjamin Orr: Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.


A mentally ill guy was living with easy access to legally procured guns. The only way to stop him from getting them would have been to force his mother to get rid of them or make him move out. Unless you want a police state coming into houses and forcibly separating people from living together or confiscating legal guns when they find mentally ill people there then something else has to be done.
 
2012-12-24 08:35:20 PM

Benjamin Orr: he cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.


I've practiced at shooting ranges without signing in. That's not hard to do.
 
2012-12-24 08:35:37 PM

Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.


Ya, murdering the legal owner and stealing the firearms is kinda sorta like legally-procured except for the legally part.
 
2012-12-24 08:36:20 PM

Somacandra: Benjamin Orr: Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.

A mentally ill guy was living with easy access to legally procured guns. The only way to stop him from getting them would have been to force his mother to get rid of them or make him move out. Unless you want a police state coming into houses and forcibly separating people from living together or confiscating legal guns when they find mentally ill people there then something else has to be done.


So just make all guns illegal then? What is your solution?
 
2012-12-24 08:36:25 PM

Somacandra: Mrtraveler01: He got them from his mom.

Exactly. That's my point. She got them legally and trained him on them. That's why I disagree with the person I was responding to.


Trained him  on him?

How is that exactly?
 
2012-12-24 08:37:11 PM
Why are these always self inflicted deaths? If a person wanted to die and do the most harm possible along the way, don't you think they'd wait and at least try to take out some cops too? I never quite understood this.
 
2012-12-24 08:37:21 PM

Indubitably: Somacandra: Mrtraveler01: He got them from his mom.

Exactly. That's my point. She got them legally and trained him on them. That's why I disagree with the person I was responding to.

Trained him  on him?

How is that exactly?


/Force-tard again.

//try 'them'
 
2012-12-24 08:37:59 PM

Somacandra: Benjamin Orr: he cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.

I've practiced at shooting ranges without signing in. That's not hard to do.


In some states (not sure about CT) it is required. I know my local ranges will not let anybody in without signing all of the forms required (insurance, proof of age,etc) and you can't get in without them checking you in.
 
2012-12-24 08:38:14 PM
If I had a hammer...
 
2012-12-24 08:39:26 PM

Coco LaFemme: Why wasn't he still in prison?


Priorities. Gotta make room for all of the real criminals. Y'know, the ones busted for pot possession.
 
2012-12-24 08:40:19 PM

Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.


not to speak ill of the dead but, his mother was a farking moron. She knew he was unstable and left them available to him, ending in hers and 26 other deaths. responsible gun owners don't advertise their arsenals nor allow access to people who have no business having them.
 
2012-12-24 08:40:19 PM

Coco LaFemme: He beat his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Why wasn't he still in prison?


She was already dead, it wasn't like he was going to do it again.
 
2012-12-24 08:40:33 PM

Benjamin Orr: Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.


Cite.
 
2012-12-24 08:41:30 PM

Mike_LowELL: [upload.wikimedia.org image 200x175]

But video games don't cause violence.  Got it.


...based on the ratio of hammers to barrels, we should be seeing 100 times more rolling barrel deaths than we do hammer deaths.
 
2012-12-24 08:42:00 PM
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a hammer is a good guy with a hammer.
 
2012-12-24 08:43:10 PM
People still kill with guns, so we should get rid of gun laws.
People still speed, so we should get rid of speeding laws.
People still do everything, so we should just get rid of laws.
 
2012-12-24 08:43:59 PM

Somacandra: A mentally ill guy was living with easy access to legally procured guns.


This is debatable.
We still don't have a clear picture of how the guns were stored (and many upscale gun safes are quite formidable, but nothing is impervious) or how much access he had.

Domestic violence is a very big cause of murders and assaults. People don't expect their own family to kill them.
Its possible she never meant for him to have access to the guns but also never saw him as such a grave threat.
She opens the safe to clean, turns her back and gets blindsided.

/If he did try to purchase a firearm on his own but got turned down, IIRC that's supposed to trigger some phone calls.
 
2012-12-24 08:44:47 PM

SquiggsIN: So someone who by law wasn't allowed to have a gun committed a mass shooting again.

Why do gun control advocates think that restricting guns is going to keep people like this from getting guns? He obviously, as a felon, was able to get a weapon. Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.


This is why I'm tired of people calling for a debate or dialogue on gun control. One side of the 'debate' has the reasoning of a three year old. When my toddler doesn't want to go to bed I don't debate her, or start a dialogue. I put her to bed. Time for the adults in this country to make and enforce a bedtime. Gun nuts using the worst analogies and hypotheticals to ensure they can keep their toys aren't worthy of a debate.

If there weren't access to guns by people who currently qualify to own one, no criminal would be able to steal that legal gun. Probably bought it with no paperwork at a gun show or through a straw purchase anyways. Or stole it from his sister who could legally own it. If thieves can steal guns from responsible gun owners, they're not really responsible gun owners are they?
 
2012-12-24 08:45:08 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.

Cite.


Link
 
2012-12-24 08:45:47 PM

way south: Somacandra: A mentally ill guy was living with easy access to legally procured guns.

This is debatable.
We still don't have a clear picture of how the guns were stored (and many upscale gun safes are quite formidable, but nothing is impervious) or how much access he had.

Domestic violence is a very big cause of murders and assaults. People don't expect their own family to kill them.
Its possible she never meant for him to have access to the guns but also never saw him as such a grave threat.
She opens the safe to clean, turns her back and gets blindsided.

/If he did try to purchase a firearm on his own but got turned down, IIRC that's supposed to trigger some phone calls.


I think he did try to buy a gun but got turned down.
 
2012-12-24 08:46:36 PM

Champion of the Sun: SquiggsIN: So someone who by law wasn't allowed to have a gun committed a mass shooting again.

Why do gun control advocates think that restricting guns is going to keep people like this from getting guns? He obviously, as a felon, was able to get a weapon. Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

This is why I'm tired of people calling for a debate or dialogue on gun control. One side of the 'debate' has the reasoning of a three year old. When my toddler doesn't want to go to bed I don't debate her, or start a dialogue. I put her to bed. Time for the adults in this country to make and enforce a bedtime. Gun nuts using the worst analogies and hypotheticals to ensure they can keep their toys aren't worthy of a debate.

If there weren't access to guns by people who currently qualify to own one, no criminal would be able to steal that legal gun. Probably bought it with no paperwork at a gun show or through a straw purchase anyways. Or stole it from his sister who could legally own it. If thieves can steal guns from responsible gun owners, they're not really responsible gun owners are they?


Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US
 
2012-12-24 08:48:35 PM
Lemme get this straight... not only was this a**hole let of prison after serving 17 YEARS for using his grandmother in a home version of "Whack-A-Mole", but another a**hole thought it was okay to sell or give him GUNS?

i1182.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-24 08:49:03 PM

Benjamin Orr: Champion of the Sun: SquiggsIN: So someone who by law wasn't allowed to have a gun committed a mass shooting again.

Why do gun control advocates think that restricting guns is going to keep people like this from getting guns? He obviously, as a felon, was able to get a weapon. Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

This is why I'm tired of people calling for a debate or dialogue on gun control. One side of the 'debate' has the reasoning of a three year old. When my toddler doesn't want to go to bed I don't debate her, or start a dialogue. I put her to bed. Time for the adults in this country to make and enforce a bedtime. Gun nuts using the worst analogies and hypotheticals to ensure they can keep their toys aren't worthy of a debate.

If there weren't access to guns by people who currently qualify to own one, no criminal would be able to steal that legal gun. Probably bought it with no paperwork at a gun show or through a straw purchase anyways. Or stole it from his sister who could legally own it. If thieves can steal guns from responsible gun owners, they're not really responsible gun owners are they?

Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US


Is there any gun regulation you would support.
 
2012-12-24 08:49:20 PM

It's Me Bender: I don't think I've seen race identified in a fark headline before.


Happens all the time. Especially in Obama headlines. And I've had at least one greenlight about Black Marines myself.
 
2012-12-24 08:51:41 PM
Seriously, if this 62 year old sh*t-for-brains thought up this plan, the rest of us better pick up our socks because that is frigging genius.
 
2012-12-24 08:51:47 PM
Need to have a permit for a hammer. Have hammer-frezones around schools, churches, etc. Maybe we can have a few hollywood types make an anti-hammer commercial. It's time to get moving folks.
 
2012-12-24 08:52:21 PM

way south: She opens the safe to clean, turns her back and gets blindsided.


Shot her in bed, possibly in her sleep.
 
2012-12-24 08:52:22 PM

i.chzbgr.com
SPENGLER! YOU ASSHOLE!
 
2012-12-24 08:52:30 PM

Captain Steroid: Lemme get this straight... not only was this a**hole let of prison after serving 17 YEARS for using his grandmother in a home version of "Whack-A-Mole", but another a**hole thought it was okay to sell or give him GUNS?

[i1182.photobucket.com image 237x348]


So it turns out, relatives of criminals can buy guns!!! Oh shiat. Plus, PPT's can be done without a NICS check.
 
2012-12-24 08:54:29 PM
Clearly this means we need to arm our firefighters.
 
2012-12-24 08:55:42 PM

Benjamin Orr: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.

Cite.

Link


Logs for one range, for the past year.
 
2012-12-24 08:55:58 PM

Mrtraveler01: Is there any gun regulation you would support.


Yes... sensible regulations that would actually make a difference (not cosmetic bullshiat that will never change anything)

One thing would be to make all non licensed person to person sales go through a licensed dealer with the same checks required if you were buying from a dealer. (aka the gun show loophole)

Better funding/reporting for the NICS database to help make sure the existing laws/restrictions for felons and people with mental issues are followed more often.

Tougher sentencing for people with illegal guns or involved in the illegal trade of guns.
 
2012-12-24 08:57:07 PM
It must have been...

www.bookwormsapple.com
 
2012-12-24 08:58:23 PM

Mrtraveler01: Clearly this means we need to arm our firefighters.


Nah, we just need capital punishment on all murderers and man-slaughterers
 
2012-12-24 08:59:25 PM

kombat_unit: Mrtraveler01: Clearly this means we need to arm our firefighters.

Nah, we just need capital punishment on all murderers and man-slaughterers


Or lock them up for life.
 
2012-12-24 08:59:42 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.

Cite.

Link

Logs for one range, for the past year.


whatever
 
2012-12-24 09:00:32 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.

Cite.

Link

Logs for one range, for the past year.


Clearly not comprehensive, but I'm pretty sure you have a link to all the other ranges she was training him at?
 
2012-12-24 09:02:08 PM

ultraholland: [www.nailgundepot.com image 400x364]

Just what purpose does this serve anyway? These things come with high-capacity magazines and are designed to fire a nail as quickly as the user can pull the trigger; some even have drums. A drum of nails?! Why can't you carpentry nuts understand that a manual hammer-and-nail combo is adequate for your uses, or does shiat like this help stroke your damaged little ego?


Colbertian!

/coal-bear Ian?
 
2012-12-24 09:02:11 PM

Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US


I'm not a fan of absolute prohibition of just about anything--the POTUS needs access to the nuclear football, of course. I would say that the very rigid controls on the sale, licensing and distribution of fully automatic firearms do pretty well. Those that need to have them have them and those that don't usually don't. Its not people with fully automatic weapons I get concerned about.
 
2012-12-24 09:05:37 PM
To lift my life/shiat is traceable and sad. And that isn't even infinitive, yo...
 
2012-12-24 09:06:20 PM

Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US


Exactly why we shouldn't have a debate. One side is as intelligent as most three year old children. Kinda hard to murder kindergartners with a zip gun. Not likely to be a bunch of homemade bathtub hooch guns if we enact stringent gun control
 
2012-12-24 09:06:20 PM

Benjamin Orr: Somacandra: Benjamin Orr: Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.

A mentally ill guy was living with easy access to legally procured guns. The only way to stop him from getting them would have been to force his mother to get rid of them or make him move out. Unless you want a police state coming into houses and forcibly separating people from living together or confiscating legal guns when they find mentally ill people there then something else has to be done.

So just make all guns illegal then? What is your solution?



His "easy access" was to commit murder. That's what he had to do to walk out of that house with the Bushmaster.
 
2012-12-24 09:09:10 PM

kombat_unit: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Benjamin Orr: Except that other family members/friends have disputed the sister-in-laws story. The cops even searched all of the shooting range check in logs and could not find her or his names anywhere.

Cite.

Link

Logs for one range, for the past year.

Clearly not comprehensive, but I'm pretty sure you have a link to all the other ranges she was training him at?


I don't really give a sh*t. Apparently he got good enough to kill twenty-six on his own.

I'm more concerned with his access to the weapons.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:02 PM

Somacandra: Happens all the time. Especially in Obama headlines. And I've had at least one greenlight about Black Marines myself.


Sorry, I meant in headlines about criminals.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:03 PM

Champion of the Sun: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

Exactly why we shouldn't have a debate. One side is as intelligent as most three year old children. Kinda hard to murder kindergartners with a zip gun. Not likely to be a bunch of homemade bathtub hooch guns if we enact stringent gun control


Who is talking about zip guns? Do you have any idea of how many people are currently making (legally btw) semi-automatic rifles?

Do you have any idea how easy it is to make something like a Sten gun with common tools?

You don't know what you are talking about... but I guess keep acting like you have any idea how hard it is to make a gun.

Plus our borders are obviously completely sealed and nothing can get into the US without us knowing about it.
 
2012-12-24 09:11:47 PM

give me doughnuts: Benjamin Orr: Somacandra: Benjamin Orr: Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.

A mentally ill guy was living with easy access to legally procured guns. The only way to stop him from getting them would have been to force his mother to get rid of them or make him move out. Unless you want a police state coming into houses and forcibly separating people from living together or confiscating legal guns when they find mentally ill people there then something else has to be done.

So just make all guns illegal then? What is your solution?


His "easy access" was to commit murder. That's what he had to do to walk out of that house with the Bushmaster.


So magically make all guns go away?
 
2012-12-24 09:12:44 PM

Benjamin Orr: Since this happened early this morning... I am going to guess he didn't use one of the scary guns since they are not reporting what kind of gun(s) he used.



4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-24 09:13:38 PM

thornhill: Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?

I doubt that it's really a motivating factor. I mean, can you cite any evidence of this?

Most of these shooters have a mental illness or are driven by extreme paranoid beliefs.


Look up copy cat suicides. Might be an extension to that.
 
2012-12-24 09:14:26 PM

Somacandra: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

I'm not a fan of absolute prohibition of just about anything--the POTUS needs access to the nuclear football, of course. I would say that the very rigid controls on the sale, licensing and distribution of fully automatic firearms do pretty well. Those that need to have them have them and those that don't usually don't. Its not people with fully automatic weapons I get concerned about.


Well that is probably because the ones with legal full-auto paid a crap ton for them and the ones with the illegal imports are shooting other drug dealers.

I don't think the Class 3 model is going to work for most guns because the scarcity just isn't there. There are hundreds of millions of guns in the US right now.
 
2012-12-24 09:16:14 PM

Champion of the Sun: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

Exactly why we shouldn't have a debate. One side is as intelligent as most three year old children. Kinda hard to murder kindergartners with a zip gun. Not likely to be a bunch of homemade bathtub hooch guns if we enact stringent gun control


I wouldn't fear the home grown weapons (its not that difficult to machine a sub machine gun tho) so much as the imports.
Weapons sold in the US are built to American rules. Weapons stolen or purchased from elsewhere do not have the same handicaps.

An AK, bought in Africa for $50 and smuggled in on the same trailers with the Cocaine and Mexican ditch weed to be sold for a hundred times the price, will be the genuine article. It will have select fire, armor piercing rounds, grenade launchers and whatever they can find.

Once the power of firearms has been centralized to a few cops and national guardsmen, the criminals will also be more likely to use illegal weapons in brazen attacks.
If you've got the money to fight these factors you become like England or Australia. There are more people suffering the effects of crime but fewer shootings.
If you don't have the cash, you become more like Mexico... Which is just one big happy basket of abuse and corruption.
 
2012-12-24 09:18:18 PM

Coco LaFemme: He beat his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Why wasn't he still in prison?


wasnt holding any weed

no use to the guards
 
2012-12-24 09:19:06 PM

Benjamin Orr: Since this happened early this morning... I am going to guess he didn't use one of the scary guns since they are not reporting what kind of gun(s) he used.


They're all scary. That's kind of the point.
 
2012-12-24 09:19:14 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: thornhill: Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?

I doubt that it's really a motivating factor. I mean, can you cite any evidence of this?

Most of these shooters have a mental illness or are driven by extreme paranoid beliefs.

Look up copy cat suicides. Might be an extension to that.


That's a different phenomenon. It's about emulating behavior you hear about. Nobody is committing suicide to get their name in the newspaper.
 
2012-12-24 09:19:17 PM

Aracnix: gwenners: [jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com image 265x400]

/hot, like a fire

If that guy his his grandmother to death with his "hammer" then I'm just impressed.


This thread has a shortage of verbs. I think I'll get hammered now.
 
2012-12-24 09:21:27 PM
Here's what I keep hearing:

1) You can't restrict access cause 2nd Amendment says we can't and any attempt to do so is unAmerican.

2) There are too many guns in circulation, so we can't possibly get them all, so why bother getting any of them?

3) We need MOAR GUNS, that'll fix the problem.

Honestly, it's enough to make a civilized man sick to his stomach.
 
2012-12-24 09:21:35 PM

Rocknutts: I live about 2 miles away where this happened. I don't know if they located his sister yet, but she is probably in one of the houses that burned down. There was a row of houses that were delapidated or boarded up. They sat on multi million dollar property. I thought that it was arson at first.


That is interesting.
 
2012-12-24 09:22:56 PM

Somacandra: The only way to stop him from getting them would have been to force his mother to get rid of them or make him move out.


Have you ever heard of a gun safe? How about a trigger lock?

I don't even own a gun and I know about them. Jeez.
 
2012-12-24 09:25:44 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: Somacandra: The only way to stop him from getting them would have been to force his mother to get rid of them or make him move out.

Have you ever heard of a gun safe? How about a trigger lock?

I don't even own a gun and I know about them. Jeez.


Lanza's mother apparently allowed him access to her firearms while she was trying to have him committed.

That's the kind of dumb mistake you only get to make once.
 
2012-12-24 09:26:20 PM

moothemagiccow: Benjamin Orr: Since this happened early this morning... I am going to guess he didn't use one of the scary guns since they are not reporting what kind of gun(s) he used.

They're all scary. That's kind of the point.


oooga booga scary guns!!!

Well I meant the scarier ones that the AWB wanted to get rid of that were exactly the same as others with wooden stocks instead of scary black stocks.
 
2012-12-24 09:27:42 PM

Infernalist: Here's what I keep hearing:

1) You can't restrict access cause 2nd Amendment says we can't and any attempt to do so is unAmerican.

2) There are too many guns in circulation, so we can't possibly get them all, so why bother getting any of them?

3) We need MOAR GUNS, that'll fix the problem.

Honestly, it's enough to make a civilized man sick to his stomach.


1) Fire!!!
2) Moar gasoline!
3) ????
4) Profit!
 
2012-12-24 09:32:39 PM

way south: Champion of the Sun: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

Exactly why we shouldn't have a debate. One side is as intelligent as most three year old children. Kinda hard to murder kindergartners with a zip gun. Not likely to be a bunch of homemade bathtub hooch guns if we enact stringent gun control

I wouldn't fear the home grown weapons (its not that difficult to machine a sub machine gun tho) so much as the imports.
Weapons sold in the US are built to American rules. Weapons stolen or purchased from elsewhere do not have the same handicaps.

An AK, bought in Africa for $50 and smuggled in on the same trailers with the Cocaine and Mexican ditch weed to be sold for a hundred times the price, will be the genuine article. It will have select fire, armor piercing rounds, grenade launchers and whatever they can find.

Once the power of firearms has been centralized to a few cops and national guardsmen, the criminals will also be more likely to use illegal weapons in brazen attacks.
If you've got the money to fight these factors you become like England or Australia. There are more people suffering the effects of crime but fewer shootings.
If you don't have the cash, you become more like Mexico... Which is just one big happy basket of abuse and corruption.


Did the batman shooter, columbine kids, or Lanza have the connections to get imported illegal guns? Could they establish an IRA connection to get automatic weapons? Stupid hypothetical. This is the real world, regular loons don't have those connections.
 
2012-12-24 09:32:50 PM

thornhill: LiberalEastCoastElitist: thornhill: Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?

I doubt that it's really a motivating factor. I mean, can you cite any evidence of this?

Most of these shooters have a mental illness or are driven by extreme paranoid beliefs.

Look up copy cat suicides. Might be an extension to that.

That's a different phenomenon. It's about emulating behavior you hear about. Nobody is committing suicide to get their name in the newspaper.


It's about emulating behavior you hear about.
It's about emulating behavior you hear about.
It's about emulating behavior you hear about.

Because they're crazy mofos. Link I rest my case.
 
2012-12-24 09:32:56 PM

Mrtraveler01: way south: Infernalist: The only thing of value that I learned from this article is that even those convicted of brutal murder can get their hands on lethal weaponry without so much as a hint of a problem.

The solution, obviously, is MOAR GUNS

The alternative is to prevent you from buying a gun and pretend that this act disarmed him.

/So you can turn off your alarm system and sleep with the doors unlocked, because the solution to crime is in the bag.
/Even if the elimination of guns was possible, I suspect that a guy who murders his own family member with a hammer will find a way to make do.

I think the question we need to ask is how did he get a gun and what c could have been done to prevent that?


Most likely he got it through a straw purchase from a legal gun dealer, buying it himself from a licensed but corrupt dealer, buying it from an unlicensed street dealer (who got it by one of the previously mentioned methods or by stealing it from a dealer or a legal owner), or he got it from friends or family.
How Criminals Get Guns
 
2012-12-24 09:33:40 PM
As a gun owner, I'm willing to have the discussion on gun registration, permits, profiling, background checking, etc. I don't mind jumping through a few hoops to make sure only responsible people will purchase weapons.
But, I'm not willing to say that banning guns will ever be the answer. You know what the opponent is playing with or POSSIBLY playing with. We know that there are already MILLIONS of guns in the world and that criminals may already have them. Unless you can guarantee that every gun in the country is going to be gone what's the point of demanding we get rid of a fraction of them?

Would you willingly start a game of chess without your queen, knights, or bishops? That's what the gun control lobby is working toward. Why willingly put yourself at a disadvantage when you already know the opposition will play dirty with ANYTHING they can get their hands on?

All the rules in the world won't stop people from getting a weapon if they want one. We can confiscate and destroy every weapon we can find and there will still be weapons out there.
 
2012-12-24 09:35:47 PM

Champion of the Sun: way south: Champion of the Sun: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

Exactly why we shouldn't have a debate. One side is as intelligent as most three year old children. Kinda hard to murder kindergartners with a zip gun. Not likely to be a bunch of homemade bathtub hooch guns if we enact stringent gun control

I wouldn't fear the home grown weapons (its not that difficult to machine a sub machine gun tho) so much as the imports.
Weapons sold in the US are built to American rules. Weapons stolen or purchased from elsewhere do not have the same handicaps.

An AK, bought in Africa for $50 and smuggled in on the same trailers with the Cocaine and Mexican ditch weed to be sold for a hundred times the price, will be the genuine article. It will have select fire, armor piercing rounds, grenade launchers and whatever they can find.

Once the power of firearms has been centralized to a few cops and national guardsmen, the criminals will also be more likely to use illegal weapons in brazen attacks.
If you've got the money to fight these factors you become like England or Australia. There are more people suffering the effects of crime but fewer shootings.
If you don't have the cash, you become more like Mexico... Which is just one big happy basket of abuse and corruption.

Did the batman shooter, columbine kids, or Lanza have the connections to get imported illegal guns? Could they establish an IRA connection to get automatic weapons? Stupid hypothetical. This is the real world, regular loons don't have those connections.


I personally have no connections to Colombian or Afghan drug lords. I can however get cocaine and heroin in about an hour.

I can also get illegal guns from those very same local connections.
 
2012-12-24 09:35:53 PM

mc_madness: Boxing analyst Max Kellerman's brother was beaten to death by a boxer with a hammer nicknamed "the Hammer".

Ironic no?


No... Calling a hammer "the hammer" is pretty much exactly what anyone would expect.
 
2012-12-24 09:37:59 PM

Champion of the Sun: way south: Champion of the Sun: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

Exactly why we shouldn't have a debate. One side is as intelligent as most three year old children. Kinda hard to murder kindergartners with a zip gun. Not likely to be a bunch of homemade bathtub hooch guns if we enact stringent gun control

I wouldn't fear the home grown weapons (its not that difficult to machine a sub machine gun tho) so much as the imports.
Weapons sold in the US are built to American rules. Weapons stolen or purchased from elsewhere do not have the same handicaps.

An AK, bought in Africa for $50 and smuggled in on the same trailers with the Cocaine and Mexican ditch weed to be sold for a hundred times the price, will be the genuine article. It will have select fire, armor piercing rounds, grenade launchers and whatever they can find.

Once the power of firearms has been centralized to a few cops and national guardsmen, the criminals will also be more likely to use illegal weapons in brazen attacks.
If you've got the money to fight these factors you become like England or Australia. There are more people suffering the effects of crime but fewer shootings.
If you don't have the cash, you become more like Mexico... Which is just one big happy basket of abuse and corruption.

Did the batman shooter, columbine kids, or Lanza have the connections to get imported illegal guns? Could they establish an IRA connection to get automatic weapons? Stupid hypothetical. This is the real world, regular loons don't have those connections.


They didn't because the value of locally made weapons on the American black market is lower than what it would cost to import them.
Prohibition reverses that, which is what pays for all the criminal overhead. The new importers, organized crooks, will buy cheap and sell high.

They will make those connections because they can flip a common weapon for at least ten times its value.
The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.

/Or do you think those wildly gyrating coke heads in a rave have personal connections in Columbia?
 
2012-12-24 09:41:34 PM

way south: They will make those connections because they can flip a common weapon for at least ten times its value.


Just like they do all over the world, right?
 
2012-12-24 09:42:20 PM
Infernalist: The only thing of value that I learned from this article is that even those convicted of brutal murder can get their hands on lethal weaponry without so much as a hint of a problem.

The solution, obviously, is MOAR GUNS

way south: The alternative is to prevent you from buying a gun and pretend that this act disarmed him.

/So you can turn off your alarm system and sleep with the doors unlocked, because the solution to crime is in the bag.
/Even if the elimination of guns was possible, I suspect that a guy who murders his own family member with a hammer will find a way to make do.

Mrtraveler01: I think the question we need to ask is how did he get a gun and what c could have been done to prevent that?

way south: Its a fair question.
I'm more curious how he left the corrections system with a serious flaw in his character left uncorrected.

Arguing about the weapon only changes the hypothetical bodycount. The problem is he decided to commit such a crime.


Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

Look at it this way, reduce the number of guns in society and you weed out the lazy and homicidal. The motivated and homicidal will then have to expend imagination and physical effort, actually engaging in hand to hand combat in order to murder. And boy howdy, hand to hand combat can be pretty tiring, let me tell you what. Much more taxing than point-and-click murder.
 
2012-12-24 09:47:32 PM
Meanwhile, Texas is wondering how come this guy didn't go for a ride on Ol' Sparky around 1982 or so - then saw the "NY" in the story and that pretty much explained everything.
 
2012-12-24 09:49:44 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: thornhill: LiberalEastCoastElitist: thornhill: Therion: How about we stop publishing their names and giving these farking assholes the publicity/notoriety they crave; and have all news media refer to shooters as "the farking asshole who ..."?

I doubt that it's really a motivating factor. I mean, can you cite any evidence of this?

Most of these shooters have a mental illness or are driven by extreme paranoid beliefs.

Look up copy cat suicides. Might be an extension to that.

That's a different phenomenon. It's about emulating behavior you hear about. Nobody is committing suicide to get their name in the newspaper.

It's about emulating behavior you hear about.
It's about emulating behavior you hear about.
It's about emulating behavior you hear about.

Because they're crazy mofos. Link I rest my case.


The issue was reporting the shooter's name, not witholding the story.

You're conflating two entirely separate issues.
 
2012-12-24 09:50:19 PM

SquiggsIN: But, I'm not willing to say that banning guns will ever be the answer. You know what the opponent is playing with or POSSIBLY playing with. We know that there are already MILLIONS of guns in the world and that criminals may already have them. Unless you can guarantee that every gun in the country is going to be gone what's the point of demanding we get rid of a fraction of them?


If there were a 100 guns in the country instead of a hundred million, they would be harder to come by, and as a result, fewer criminals would be able to obtain them and use them for murder. If weapons became rarer, they would become more valuable, kept carefully cleaned and oiled in secure safes, rather than cavalierly stored and easily stolen.

As I've noted, the Catch 22 of firearms is that the more firearms in the hands of the law abiding, the more firearms in the hands of the criminals.
 
2012-12-24 09:52:13 PM

way south: The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.


For the sake of argument, wouldn't it be possible for prohibition to make guns so rare that it would be very difficult for a common person to raise the money and find the criminal element willing to sell them a gun? For example, can a pair of 15 years go out and buy a RPG, even with time and planning to save money and find a dealer? What about the fact that these mass murders are the exception to the rule in terms of forethought? Any cop will tell you the typical criminal is dumb and impulsive. I read somewhere that stop and frisk is forcing gang bangers to hide their guns rather than carry them on their person, and for that reason, there are fewer gun crimes (i.e. lack of spontaneity).
 
2012-12-24 09:55:58 PM

Gulper Eel: Meanwhile, Texas is wondering how come this guy didn't go for a ride on Ol' Sparky around 1982 or so - then saw the "NY" in the story and that pretty much explained everything.


Even if you add up the guy's mother and the 2 firefighters, Texas has still probably killed more innocent people than this asshole.
 
2012-12-24 09:56:23 PM

JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.


...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.
 
2012-12-24 10:07:19 PM

Champion of the Sun: If there weren't access to guns by people who currently qualify to own one, no criminal would be able to steal that legal gun.


Okay, let's imagine that, by some miracle of magic, you actually managed to get through restrictions that would actually disarm America's hunters. (You won't ever actually manage this, but until you do, you haven't actually done anything to limit access to guns more than the limits the Sandy Hook shooter already faced.) All right. Now let's assume that all the previously-legal guns get handed in (which is even less likely). Then, hell, as long as we're piling on ludicrous improbabilities, we invent an absolutely perfect border fence technology that makes it impossible to smuggle guns into the US.

You know what happens to the number of firearm murders in the US? Nothing that'll show up in the statistics. Semi-automatic weapons are not some sort of sophisticated super-technology. They're century-old designs easily made with common metalworking tools. Propellant and primers for ammo are about as hard to cook up as meth (though moderately more likely to blow up the neighbors). Millions of guns will get manufactured in small metal shops across the country, and they flood the streets.

But, hey, now we can have a full-out War on Guns that'll be just as fully effective as the War on Drugs . . . at justifying the erosion of civil liberties and funneling money into street gangs and organized crime. Congratulations, you just made America that much worse a place to live!

Hey, you know what we could outlaw next? Alcohol. Just think of all the lives we could save if drunk drivers couldn't legally get liquor . . . .
 
2012-12-24 10:11:31 PM

thornhill: The issue was reporting the shooter's name, not witholding the story.

You're conflating two entirely separate issues.


I'm not allowed to change the discussion to what I think is the actual cause? Ok.
 
2012-12-24 10:11:40 PM

WordsnCollision: It must have been...

[www.bookwormsapple.com image 400x662]


Good book, but Anvil of the Stars was better.
 
2012-12-24 10:11:41 PM

way south: JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.


Oh, brroootherrr...
 
2012-12-24 10:13:37 PM
Maybe someday -- society will get it's head out of it's as and realize when we have someone in custody that's been *proven* to have murdered someone we take them and dispose of them in the most cost effective method possible.

Hanging, firing squad, medical experiments? I really don't care.

I'm really tired of every terrible news story saying that (more) people died because society doesn't have the balls to take out the trash.

I'd love to know the logic of the people in the courtroom/jail/social workers who saw: "oh he killed his grandma with a hammer, let''s release him, he's probably learned his lesson"

Had society done what needed to be done -- two men would be home with their families tonight enjoying christmas. More sadness fills the world because of our weakness in the past.
 
2012-12-24 10:17:33 PM

Somacandra: way south: The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff)...Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.

Not to mention the cost of the innocent lives taken by the State. With a life w/o parole sentence at least you can release someone who is vindicated later.


Well, to be fair, the death penalty does prevent repeat murder. If this guy had been executed, the firefighters would be alive today and there wouldn't have been any burning house to begin with. And murderers escape and murder again, they murder other prisoners and prison staff. And so on, over and over. So there's a cost to not executing them too.
 
2012-12-24 10:18:23 PM

accelerus: Maybe someday -- society will get it's head out of it's as and realize when we have someone in custody that's been *proven* to have murdered someone we take them and dispose of them in the most cost effective method possible.

Hanging, firing squad, medical experiments? I really don't care.

I'm really tired of every terrible news story saying that (more) people died because society doesn't have the balls to take out the trash.

I'd love to know the logic of the people in the courtroom/jail/social workers who saw: "oh he killed his grandma with a hammer, let''s release him, he's probably learned his lesson"

Had society done what needed to be done -- two men would be home with their families tonight enjoying christmas. More sadness fills the world because of our weakness in the past.


Intelligent application of the law says, he  might be a repeat offender.

Real application of the law says: lock him away in an environment environed to recidivate...

What we must do: Realize: Legalize. Teach. That is all.
 
2012-12-24 10:18:37 PM

Evil Canadian: He did his time, which was totally appropriate for the charge he pled, did his parole and lived quietly for the 14 years since his release.


Except for that whole felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm thing.
 
2012-12-24 10:18:38 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: way south: The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.

For the sake of argument, wouldn't it be possible for prohibition to make guns so rare that it would be very difficult for a common person to raise the money and find the criminal element willing to sell them a gun?


To the same extent that drug prohibition has made drugs so rare that it's very difficult for a common person to raise the money and find the criminal element willing to sell them cocaine. Guns just aren't that hard to make; pretty much any auto body shop in the country could churn out a Colt 1911 given blueprints.
 
2012-12-24 10:22:27 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: thornhill: The issue was reporting the shooter's name, not witholding the story.

You're conflating two entirely separate issues.

I'm not allowed to change the discussion to what I think is the actual cause? Ok.


Someone suggested that the media should stop reporting the names of mass killers, arguing that they're motivated to kill to get their 15 minutes of fame. I asked if there was any evidence for that working. You cited a phenomena that is totally unrelated to the assertion of the original poster.
 
2012-12-24 10:23:29 PM

Verzio: . Guns just aren't that hard to make; pretty much any auto body shop in the country could churn out a Colt 1911 given blueprints.


Just like they do all over the world, right?
 
2012-12-24 10:23:37 PM

Mrtraveler01: kombat_unit: Mrtraveler01: Clearly this means we need to arm our firefighters.

Nah, we just need capital punishment on all murderers and man-slaughterers

Or lock them up for life.


Why should we as a society pay millions upon millions of dollars for a murderer to sit in an AC'd cell, 3 meals a day, free medical care, and all the time in the world to pump iron or read.

How and why "it's costs 1 million dollars to execute someone" -- no, it costs 50 cents for the ammo, or a few bucks for the rope. Throw in a sheet to cover them up, and pay for transport, we are looking at 50 bucks max.

When someone has nothing to lose in life -- and they realize they can live out their dream of killing people *AND* get free rent, free food, free medicine,
 
2012-12-24 10:23:51 PM
JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

way south: ...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.



I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any changes.

That's what we're dealing with right now.
 
2012-12-24 10:25:48 PM

LiberalEastCoastElitist: way south: The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.

For the sake of argument, wouldn't it be possible for prohibition to make guns so rare that it would be very difficult for a common person to raise the money and find the criminal element willing to sell them a gun? For example, can a pair of 15 years go out and buy a RPG, even with time and planning to save money and find a dealer? What about the fact that these mass murders are the exception to the rule in terms of forethought? Any cop will tell you the typical criminal is dumb and impulsive. I read somewhere that stop and frisk is forcing gang bangers to hide their guns rather than carry them on their person, and for that reason, there are fewer gun crimes (i.e. lack of spontaneity).


This was part of the alcohol and drug prohibition argument too.
If you make drugs expensive, people wont use them habitually... How many fifteen year olds sustain their addiction to weed?

The problem is that weapons aren't expensive to manufacture. We pay a premium because of the ATF and our import restrictions.
Many big companies that deal in the US actually have factories overseas. They send them here as kits to skirt the import ban and pay Americans to assemble the guns.
This jacks up the price.

A Norinco M-14 could probably be got for around $500, but a US Springfield will run you over $1400 (That was before the Barakopocalypse Firearmageddon. Expect to pay much more now).
Something more popular and stupidly mass produced, like the AK platform, could probably be found for under a hundred or two from other nations.
If people make arms smuggling a business on US soil, prices could vary but they'd still make a tidy profit selling at what we pay retail now.

I've heard varying estimates that Klebold and Harris dropped anywhere from $800 to $2k.
Assuming they only needed two weapons, you could probably still squeak a deal through for real assault rifles.

Purely speculation tho.
If the AWB was a firearm ban instead of a magazine ban, its likely there would have been many domestic weapons still available to paying customers.
 
2012-12-24 10:26:10 PM

JungleBoogie: JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

way south: ...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.


I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any change ...


You oversimplify, friend, and you know it...
 
2012-12-24 10:26:21 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Verzio: . Guns just aren't that hard to make; pretty much any auto body shop in the country could churn out a Colt 1911 given blueprints.

Just like they do all over the world, right?


They seem to do OK in Afghanistan, pakistan, the Philippines and elsewhere
 
2012-12-24 10:26:51 PM

JungleBoogie: Well, to be fair, the death penalty does prevent repeat murder.


If the system actually worked as advertised - convicting only the guilty and releasing the innocent - I'd agree with you.

However, given how many people have been exonerated by Innocense Project (300 freed, 18 from death row), the entire system is suspect. Those are the lucky few where there was DNA evidence available to exonerate them. How many more innocent people are waiting on death row for cases where there is no DNA to test?

Our justice system is founded on the belief that it's better for a dozen guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to hang. We, as a society, have lost sight of our principles in our quest to punish people for increasingly-more dubious "crimes" (EG unauthorized possession of an eagle feather is a federal felony)
 
2012-12-24 10:30:06 PM

JungleBoogie: JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

way south: ...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.


I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any changes.

That's what we're dealing with right now.


No, more realistically what we're dealing with right now is the airplane industry responding to actual faults while pointing out changes to other systems won't fix some of the goddamn problems that precipitated the crash, like the pilot being a raving lunatic or being suicidal and wanting to drive the plane into a mountain.

You act like we don't give a shiat, we do. We just want changes that would actually, you know, fix the problems that precipitated the events and address the behavior instead of using them as fodder to drive pointless, knee jerk legislation that would not have prevented this in the first place.
 
2012-12-24 10:30:28 PM

St_Francis_P: In later statements to police, Spengler admitted he'd hit his legally blind grandmother several times with the handle of a hammer during a violent argument over her going into the basement, where he'd warned her not to go for her own safety.

A graduate of Marvin Gaye Sr. school of family persuasion. Obscure? Study it out.

 
2012-12-24 10:35:32 PM

way south: LiberalEastCoastElitist: way south: The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.

For the sake of argument, wouldn't it be possible for prohibition to make guns so rare that it would be very difficult for a common person to raise the money and find the criminal element willing to sell them a gun? For example, can a pair of 15 years go out and buy a RPG, even with time and planning to save money and find a dealer? What about the fact that these mass murders are the exception to the rule in terms of forethought? Any cop will tell you the typical criminal is dumb and impulsive. I read somewhere that stop and frisk is forcing gang bangers to hide their guns rather than carry them on their person, and for that reason, there are fewer gun crimes (i.e. lack of spontaneity).

This was part of the alcohol and drug prohibition argument too.
If you make drugs expensive, people wont use them habitually... How many fifteen year olds sustain their addiction to weed?

The problem is that weapons aren't expensive to manufacture. We pay a premium because of the ATF and our import restrictions.
Many big companies that deal in the US actually have factories overseas. They send them here as kits to skirt the import ban and pay Americans to assemble the guns.
This jacks up the price.

A Norinco M-14 could probably be got for around $500, but a US Springfield will run you over $1400 (That was before the Barakopocalypse Firearmageddon. Expect to pay much more now).
Something more popular and stupidly mass produced, like the AK platform, could probably be found for under a hundred or two from other nations.
If people make arms smuggling a business on US soil, prices could vary but they'd still make a tidy profit selling at what we pay retail now.

I've heard varying estimates that Klebold and Harris dropped anywhere from $800 to $2k.
Assuming they only needed two weapons, you could probably still squeak a deal through for real assault rifles.

Purely speculation tho.
If the AWB was a firearm ban instead of a magazine ban, its likely there would have been many domestic weapons still available to paying customers.


A few friends of mine work in law enforcement and track weapons as part of drug and gang stuff. Their observations and experience has been that guns go to gangs where guns are hard to get through established routes, and that pretty much anything is available for the right price. Ban guns, and people wanting them anyway will make for big business for corrupt cops, military (who have a surprisingly nonzero number of guns and gear disappearing), and cartels. Hell gangs already use the military as a training ground for their members.
 
2012-12-24 10:39:13 PM

accelerus: Maybe someday -- society will get it's head out of it's as and realize when we have someone in custody that's been *proven* to have murdered someone we take them and dispose of them in the most cost effective method possible.

Hanging, firing squad, medical experiments? I really don't care.

I'm really tired of every terrible news story saying that (more) people died because society doesn't have the balls to take out the trash.

I'd love to know the logic of the people in the courtroom/jail/social workers who saw: "oh he killed his grandma with a hammer, let''s release him, he's probably learned his lesson"

Had society done what needed to be done -- two men would be home with their families tonight enjoying christmas. More sadness fills the world because of our weakness in the past.


I can't disagree with your conclusion, but the method of trash removal says much about our society. I can support the death penalty as a preventative measure.
 
2012-12-24 10:39:46 PM
JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

way south: ...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.

JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any change ...

Indubitably: You oversimplify, friend, and you know it...


No. I've reduced it to its essence.

This is not a conceptually difficult issue. We could mitigate the situation if we wanted to.

Instead the NRA has said they'll oppose any new gun regulations and instead blame violent video games. It's going to be harder to fast-track commit those with homicidal ideation because of "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" syndrome. The fact remains if the offenders couldn't get firearms, they'd be significantly hobbled in their attempt to commit mayhem. And if those with homicidal ideation could be committed upon discovery, for treatment, that would again dramatically reduce the pool of offenders.

Making bombs is hard. The Columbine offenders tried it and failed miserably. Once in a blue moon, a bomber gets it right but it is hard. None of the other weapons mentioned is nearly as lethal as a firearm. The reason combat soldiers are issued firearms instead of hammers and knives is because they are the most lethal weapon available
 
2012-12-24 10:39:59 PM

clyph: JungleBoogie: Well, to be fair, the death penalty does prevent repeat murder.

If the system actually worked as advertised - convicting only the guilty and releasing the innocent - I'd agree with you.

However, given how many people have been exonerated by Innocense Project (300 freed, 18 from death row), the entire system is suspect. Those are the lucky few where there was DNA evidence available to exonerate them. How many more innocent people are waiting on death row for cases where there is no DNA to test?

Our justice system is founded on the belief that it's better for a dozen guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to hang. We, as a society, have lost sight of our principles in our quest to punish people for increasingly-more dubious "crimes" (EG unauthorized possession of an eagle feather is a federal felony)


We as a society have also stopped accepting that we as a society have a duty to help fix the problems with mental health and abject poverty, drug addiction, and other factors that tend to drive violent crime.

One other thing that makes me wonder is that a lot of anti gunners cite suicide numbers as part of gun deaths. While technically gun deaths, is it not a right of the person to choose his own death for himself, and the manner in which he goes? Why do we judge these as crimes or heinous acts when it's their choice? I firmly believe that if someone wants out it's their decision and not for me to stop or judge.
 
2012-12-24 10:40:37 PM

way south: Mrtraveler01: Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.

He got them from his mom.

That's the problem with kids these days.
When I was his age we had to work hard and save up for our rampage guns.

/Ok... maybe that's too soon.


Was it funny? Were you saying it to a victim or their family/friends? THEN IT WASN'T TOO SOON!

Seriously, does ANYone think those poor people are going anywhere NEAR people posting on the internet?
 
2012-12-24 10:44:38 PM

way south: Mrtraveler01: way south: Wayne 985: kombat_unit: stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny

Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.

I wouldn't care if he was executed or not, but you're dishonest to pretend that life without parole is not a (cheaper) option.

The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff).
Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.

/I'm ambivalent on the death penalty but at least make that distinction clear.
/IIRC it has no statistical effect on crime.

Damn that due process amiright?

Nothing against the process. But the implication that death is more expensive than life presumes that he simply wont litigate anyway after avoiding the hangman's noose, and that a lower cost is justification for our moral choices.
It doesn't take into account the cost of what happens when he causes trouble in prison.

/or maybe kills or injures another inmate.
/or gets out and kills firemen in an ambush.
/The lawsuit over his wrongful execution would probably have cost less than all the death benefits we'll be paying out.
/Morally incorrect but look at the savings!


My big concern are the innocent people who get caught in that net. If we do have a death penalty, I'm willing to pay more to ensure we don't get a repeat of Cameron Todd Willingham.
 
2012-12-24 10:46:57 PM

accelerus:
Had society done what needed to be done -- two men would be home with their families tonight enjoying christmas. More sadness fills the world because of our weakness in the past.


If everybody convicted of murder or manslaughter were executed, this guy probably wouldn't have confessed to killing his grandmother, and he might not have been convicted.
And if every murder and manslaughter convict were executed, innocent people would be killed by the government. Not all convicts are guilty.
 
2012-12-24 10:47:50 PM

JungleBoogie: JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

way south: ...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.

JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any change ...

Indubitably: You oversimplify, friend, and you know it...

No. I've reduced it to its essence.

This is not a conceptually difficult issue. We could mitigate the situation if we wanted to.

Instead the NRA has said they'll oppose any new gun regulations and instead blame violent video games. It's going to be harder to fast-track commit those with homicidal ideation because of "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" syndrome. The fact remains if the offenders couldn't get firearms, they'd be significantly hobbled in their attempt to commit mayhem. And if those with homicidal ideation could be committed upon discovery, for treatment, that would again dramatically reduce the pool of offenders.

Making bombs is hard. The Columbine offenders tried it and failed miserably. Once in a blue moon, a bomber gets it right but it is hard. None of the other weapons mentioned is nearly as lethal as a firearm. The reason combat soldiers are issued firearms instead of hammers and knives is because they are the most lethal weapon available


Actually, making bombs isn't hard at all. Any combustible of sufficient energy inside of an enclosed container is a bomb. Detonation is often as simple as creating a spark. Despite what you see on TV, most IEDs and other simple devices are easily cobbled together from hardware store parts.

An example: MAPP gas and propane are already sold unregulated and unchecked at hardware stores in handy pint sized containers. Add a magnesium road flare (also available all over the place) to a weakened area of the bottle such that the heat can permeate and ignite the gas, and boom. (Oversimplifying since I don't want anyone to actually make a bomb).

Other types of explosive or chemical weapons can be made simply by mixing household chemicals that are again unregulated.

Making these things isn't hard, just takes some prep and a little googling.
 
2012-12-24 10:48:33 PM
Those firefighter thugs should have armed themselves before invading his sovereign home.
 
2012-12-24 10:49:38 PM

Kit Fister: One other thing that makes me wonder is that a lot of anti gunners cite suicide numbers as part of gun deaths. While technically gun deaths, is it not a right of the person to choose his own death for himself, and the manner in which he goes? Why do we judge these as crimes or heinous acts when it's their choice? I firmly believe that if someone wants out it's their decision and not for me to stop or judge.


Yeah, that's great. A vet goes unemployed for a few months, loses a parent or has difficulty with his marriage and, bang! His troubles are over.

I'm sure his kids won't miss that loser.
 
2012-12-24 10:49:53 PM

JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any changes.


I've used enough guns to know that there is alot more to it than point and click (I'd win more matches if they were) and these guys like to rig situations that meet their capabilities. Some of them spent time practicing and working out the best scenario to cause damage. You won't often see them climb a tower with a pistol and try to snipe, just as the smart ones won't take a bolt action into a building and try to corner people. They can think just like you or me when it comes to problem solving and will adapt the tool at hand to the goals they have.
Its incredibly difficult to stop creativity by limiting the tools.

Even with a ban you'll still need guns in society to enforce laws on those who don't comply. What You are attempting is to centralize power among the police, who aren't any less corruptible than normal citizens. So Contraband is likely sneak in and crooks will slip through the cracks.
Guys like this could evade death row and end up living next to you, and there's a good chance they will still get their hands on an illegal weapon such as he did.

If you were his neighbor all these years, would you feel comfortable being disarmed on the theory that it it makes you safer?

/I know you'd argue that you'd simply move or something. But the fact is many people either don't have the means or don't recognize that their own neighbors might be a threat.
/But they do know that the world is a dangerous place and choose to be prepared accordingly.
/Its possible that a belief that his neighbors were prepared is what lead him to create an ambush VS simply walking next door and killing them.
 
2012-12-24 10:50:36 PM

way south: They didn't because the value of locally made weapons on the American black market is lower than what it would cost to import them.
Prohibition reverses that, which is what pays for all the criminal overhead. The new importers, organized crooks, will buy cheap and sell high.

They will make those connections because they can flip a common weapon for at least ten times its value.
The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.

/Or do you think those wildly gyrating coke heads in a rave have personal connections in Columbia?


Benjamin Orr: I personally have no connections to Colombian or Afghan drug lords. I can however get cocaine and heroin in about an hour.

I can also get illegal guns from those very same local connections.



You brought up AKs from Africa. Your drug dealer can hook those up? And obviously there aren't connections between local dealers directly with suppliers in Afghanistan. There's a chain of people involved, and most of those people aren't gonna traffic stolen weapons. How much does an auto weigh? Volume of one? I'd wager that the same volume of cocaine or heroin is more valuable, and is a renewable resource. Poppies are a lot easier for a source to obtain regularly than automatic weapons.

And legal automatic weapons are already really expensive, about $30k, right? So since they're so expensive there should be a thriving black market for them currently, right? Your fantasy scenarios don't hold water. Lanza and the Columbine shooters would not have been able to obtain powerful weapons if we had meaningful gun control. Yeah, hunting rifles and such probably. If we have new gun control laws, you think your local coke dealer is gonna start dealing in weapons? Can you keister a weapon, or flush it down the toilet if you feel the heat? Do your customers get hooked on guns and keep buying from you? Drug dealers make money on repeat customers, how many guns are low level dealers really gonna move? And any weapons they can get you now were stolen from irresponsible gun owners (if your gun is stolen you didn't take care of it properly). Your entire premise is bullshiat, you don't seem to have a firm grasp on reality. Please stay away from elementary schools and movie theaters.

One more reason we don't need to have a debate, one side cannot separate fantasy from reality.
 
2012-12-24 10:54:18 PM

JungleBoogie: JungleBoogie: Instead of point and click, 4 firefighters shot, 2 dead with no more effort than a trigger pull, he would have had to come after them howling with a hammer. Which probably would have had one firefighter injured, if that.

way south: ...Or he could have walked up calmly appearing like just another bystander, then clicked a dead man switch and killed a dozen people with pipe bombs.
This is how many modern ambushes often go down. He could have thrown acid or gasoline on the men. He could also have stabbed two or three people with a fifteen inch bowie before anyone figured out they were being attacked.
Its difficult to say because, for whatever reason, he chose the gun. If the gun was not there, there is no proof he could only have chosen a hammer over, say, using an automobile to plow into the crowd. He put enough effort into making this plan and you are making a logical leap to say that he would then be too lazy to think up an alternative to a firearm.
If he wanted to save the greatest amount of effort, he would have eaten the bullet all by himself.

...But now we are arguing about a hypothetical body count, and this is pointless.
The problem is still the fact that he got out of bed thinking "I want to kill a bunch of people today".
You are looking for one or two less deaths by way of harshing millions of mellows, I'm looking for how we could have prevented the situation entirely.

JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any ...


Come on, man, seriously?
 
2012-12-24 10:56:32 PM

Champion of the Sun: way south: They didn't because the value of locally made weapons on the American black market is lower than what it would cost to import them.
Prohibition reverses that, which is what pays for all the criminal overhead. The new importers, organized crooks, will buy cheap and sell high.

They will make those connections because they can flip a common weapon for at least ten times its value.
The Columbine kids wouldn't have to do anything but front the cash.

/Or do you think those wildly gyrating coke heads in a rave have personal connections in Columbia?

Benjamin Orr: I personally have no connections to Colombian or Afghan drug lords. I can however get cocaine and heroin in about an hour.

I can also get illegal guns from those very same local connections.


You brought up AKs from Africa. Your drug dealer can hook those up? And obviously there aren't connections between local dealers directly with suppliers in Afghanistan. There's a chain of people involved, and most of those people aren't gonna traffic stolen weapons. How much does an auto weigh? Volume of one? I'd wager that the same volume of cocaine or heroin is more valuable, and is a renewable resource. Poppies are a lot easier for a source to obtain regularly than automatic weapons.

And legal automatic weapons are already really expensive, about $30k, right? So since they're so expensive there should be a thriving black market for them currently, right? Your fantasy scenarios don't hold water. Lanza and the Columbine shooters would not have been able to obtain powerful weapons if we had meaningful gun control. Yeah, hunting rifles and such probably. If we have new gun control laws, you think your local coke dealer is gonna start dealing in weapons? Can you keister a weapon, or flush it down the toilet if you feel the heat? Do your customers get hooked on guns and keep buying from you? Drug dealers make money on repeat customers, how many guns are low level dealers really gonna move? And any weapons they can get you now were stolen from irresponsible gun owners (if your gun is stolen you didn't take care of it properly). Your entire premise is bullshiat, you don't seem to have a firm grasp on reality. Please stay away from elementary schools and movie theaters.

One more reason we don't need to have a debate, one side cannot separate fantasy from reality.


Friends in law enforcement have found certain gangs with full autos brought in across the border through Mexico. Getting them isn't hard with the right contacts And money. Not fantasy at all, it's happened more than once that we know about.
 
2012-12-24 10:57:45 PM

Wayne 985: way south: Mrtraveler01: way south: Wayne 985: kombat_unit: stirfrybry: Good thing he didn't get the death penalty for killing granny

Good thing or the fark progessive crocodile tears would have been immense when they carried out the sentence.

I wouldn't care if he was executed or not, but you're dishonest to pretend that life without parole is not a (cheaper) option.

The death penalty costs less than 50 cents a bullet (if we use the good stuff).
Its the litigation and appeals that cost so much.

/I'm ambivalent on the death penalty but at least make that distinction clear.
/IIRC it has no statistical effect on crime.

Damn that due process amiright?

Nothing against the process. But the implication that death is more expensive than life presumes that he simply wont litigate anyway after avoiding the hangman's noose, and that a lower cost is justification for our moral choices.
It doesn't take into account the cost of what happens when he causes trouble in prison.

/or maybe kills or injures another inmate.
/or gets out and kills firemen in an ambush.
/The lawsuit over his wrongful execution would probably have cost less than all the death benefits we'll be paying out.
/Morally incorrect but look at the savings!

My big concern are the innocent people who get caught in that net. If we do have a death penalty, I'm willing to pay more to ensure we don't get a repeat of Cameron Todd Willingham.


That is a perfectly defensible viewpoint and I can respect that.
We should do it because its the right thing to do, even if it isn't the most efficient.

/I'm not against the death penalty, but it doesn't seem to work at deterring crime.
/Guns do seem to work.
/No one ever said the world made sense.
 
2012-12-24 10:58:54 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Kit Fister: One other thing that makes me wonder is that a lot of anti gunners cite suicide numbers as part of gun deaths. While technically gun deaths, is it not a right of the person to choose his own death for himself, and the manner in which he goes? Why do we judge these as crimes or heinous acts when it's their choice? I firmly believe that if someone wants out it's their decision and not for me to stop or judge.

Yeah, that's great. A vet goes unemployed for a few months, loses a parent or has difficulty with his marriage and, bang! His troubles are over.

I'm sure his kids won't miss that loser.


Yes because a vet with those tendencies isn't at all noticeble, and people can't ever intervene before be does it. Right.
 
2012-12-24 10:59:26 PM
So a mentally ill man got his hands on a gun and perpetrated evil acts. More families get to bury loved ones during the holiday season. But hey, what do you care? You get to keep your guns. Those cold machines built to deal death will keep you warm at night. Enjoy them.
 
2012-12-24 11:00:00 PM
If Mexican criminals have so many guns they could start a large scale black market export business, why do they buy guns in the US?
 
2012-12-24 11:00:24 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Kit Fister: One other thing that makes me wonder is that a lot of anti gunners cite suicide numbers as part of gun deaths. While technically gun deaths, is it not a right of the person to choose his own death for himself, and the manner in which he goes? Why do we judge these as crimes or heinous acts when it's their choice? I firmly believe that if someone wants out it's their decision and not for me to stop or judge.

Yeah, that's great. A vet goes unemployed for a few months, loses a parent or has difficulty with his marriage and, bang! His troubles are over.

I'm sure his kids won't miss that loser.


Also how selfish is it to demand that someone who has a reason to go continue to live? Why is it YOUR choice how they end their lives?
 
2012-12-24 11:02:15 PM

Kit Fister: Friends in law enforcement have found certain gangs with full autos brought in across the border through Mexico. Getting them isn't hard with the right contacts And money. Not fantasy at all, it's happened more than once that we know about.


Exactly, Lanza and the Columbine kids don't, and never would, have those contacts. Yeah, MS13 and the Bloods can get those weapons and that's bad too. But there's no way an autistic weirdo from Connecticut is gonna know how to get high powered weapons from a black market.

And, most of those AKs coming through are being used by gang members to kill other gang members. Sometimes innocents get killed, but usually just street trash killing street trash.
 
2012-12-24 11:03:06 PM

Kit Fister: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Kit Fister: One other thing that makes me wonder is that a lot of anti gunners cite suicide numbers as part of gun deaths. While technically gun deaths, is it not a right of the person to choose his own death for himself, and the manner in which he goes? Why do we judge these as crimes or heinous acts when it's their choice? I firmly believe that if someone wants out it's their decision and not for me to stop or judge.

Yeah, that's great. A vet goes unemployed for a few months, loses a parent or has difficulty with his marriage and, bang! His troubles are over.

I'm sure his kids won't miss that loser.

Yes because a vet with those tendencies isn't at all noticeble, and people can't ever intervene before be does it. Right.


Oh, you got me. That NEVER happens.
 
2012-12-24 11:04:45 PM
JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any changes.

That's what we're dealing with right now.

Kit Fister: No, more realistically what we're dealing with right now is the airplane industry responding to actual faults while pointing out changes to other systems won't fix some of the goddamn problems that precipitated the crash, like the pilot being a raving lunatic or being suicidal and wanting to drive the plane into a mountain.

You act like we don't give a shiat, we do. We just want changes that would actually, you know, fix the problems that precipitated the events and address the behavior instead of using them as fodder to drive pointless, knee jerk legislation that would not have prevented this in the first place.


Ah yes, the "root causes."

You know what the root cause of Newton was, and of today's multiple shooting was? A homicidal individual was able to get a firearm.

It's not conceptually complicated. There are highly organized moneyed interests and their dupes that have bought into the industry's PR campaign who are fighting to maintain the status quo while they obfuscate and pursue "root causes" like OJ pursued the "real killers." While they buy time and hope the whole thing blows over.

I'm dealing with reality, stripping away the obfuscatory BS: the Catch 22 is the more firearms in the hands of the law abiding, the more firearms in the hands of criminals. That's a fact. It derives from the "Criminals don't obey laws!" cry. That's right they don't. And the more firearms that are out there, the more firearms they are going to get.
 
2012-12-24 11:05:32 PM

Dansker: If Mexican criminals have so many guns they could start a large scale black market export business, why do they buy guns in the US?


Convenience. Cartels get guns from a lot of sources. Lower level gangs that don't have the influence and resources import from the US (because we made it possible and easy), while many of the more established cartels either get them from military folks deserting or simply on the payroll, or buy them from countries where manufacture and export is common and not tightly controlled. It's the same method Russian gear ends up in the hands of African warlords and in the hands of the Serbs during that whole conflict. Corrupt military sold shiat out the back door.

You assume that all of the guns identified and captured in Mexico came from here, when in reality only a large portion of the ones that could be traced did, and those were a small number of the total.
 
2012-12-24 11:06:55 PM
can't we just harvest the organs of the mentally ill.

/merry christmas
 
2012-12-24 11:11:49 PM

JungleBoogie: JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any changes.

That's what we're dealing with right now.

Kit Fister: No, more realistically what we're dealing with right now is the airplane industry responding to actual faults while pointing out changes to other systems won't fix some of the goddamn problems that precipitated the crash, like the pilot being a raving lunatic or being suicidal and wanting to drive the plane into a mountain.

You act like we don't give a shiat, we do. We just want changes that would actually, you know, fix the problems that precipitated the events and address the behavior instead of using them as fodder to drive pointless, knee jerk legislation that would not have prevented this in the first place.

Ah yes, the "root causes."

You know what the root cause of Newton was, and of today's multiple shooting was? A homicidal individual was able to get a firearm.

It's not conceptually complicated. There are highly organized moneyed interests and their dupes that have bought into the industry's PR campaign who are fighting to maintain the status quo while they obfuscate and pursue "root causes" like OJ pursued the "real killers." While they buy time and hope the whole thing blows over.

I'm dealing with reality, stripping away the obfuscatory BS: the Catch 22 is the more firearms in the hands of the law abiding, the more firearms in the hands of criminals. That's a fact. It derives from the "Criminals don't obey laws!" cry. That's right they don't. And the more firearms that are out there, the more firearms they are going to get.


Except that the numbers put out by the FBI disagree with you, showing declines in all facets of crime even as ownership goes up. It's as if crime happens and will continue to happen no matter what we do, and has little connection to what you believe to be true.

and, no, in fact it wasn't caused because a mentally disturbed person got a gun (illegally because he was denied legally), it's because a mentally disturbed person wasn't allowed treatment by his own mom. That she exposed him to guns and denied him medical care even when the dad provided money to cover it is grossly negligent already.

Let's not continue to argue that Adam Lanza would hAve been a model citizen if not for those evil guns, because it ain't true.
 
2012-12-24 11:12:29 PM

Champion of the Sun: Legal automatic weapons are already really expensive, about $30k, right?


Marked up by scarcity.
Automatics are legal IF you pass the ATF's checks, IF you pony up for a $200 tax stamp, and IF they are registered with the ATF as machine guns.
In 1986 Charlie Rangal pushed the Hughes amendment into the firearm owners protection act, which closed the list.
(If your wondering why Gun owners buck like bronco's when registration or licencing is mentioned, this is why).

So the only machine guns a civilian can own must be registered before 1986.
Due to damage, loss, and the occasional theft that number is shrinking and prices are always going up.
So $30k doesn't represent the actual value of an AK, just the cost of collecting rare things.

Now bear in mind that AK's are not made in most parts of Africa. They were dumped there by the Russians and others trying to gain favor with local warlords. Many of them were poorly made. You could scoop them up for a few bucks.
The best ones direct from Izenmash/Kalash, probably a few hundred bucks.
Somewhere in between is where you'll buy it at.

Where would you buy it?
Probably the gun free zone of Mexico, which is notorious for the number of weapons stockpiled by the drug lords.
Some of them come from military inventories, some from international arms traders trying to make a quick sell.

Can someone who imports drugs find guns? Yes.
What kinds? All kinds.
Can they get them cheap? Debatable, but I suspect yes.

What we are missing is a black market in the US that would pay for the trouble of importing a rifle rather than, say, ten pounds of drugs.
If you've got a million crooks paying, gun running starts to make more sense.
 
2012-12-24 11:14:33 PM
JungleBoogie: Making bombs is hard. The Columbine offenders tried it and failed miserably. Once in a blue moon, a bomber gets it right but it is hard. None of the other weapons mentioned is nearly as lethal as a firearm. The reason combat soldiers are issued firearms instead of hammers and knives is because they are the most lethal weapon available

Kit Fister: Actually, making bombs isn't hard at all. Any combustible of sufficient energy inside of an enclosed container is a bomb. Detonation is often as simple as creating a spark. Despite what you see on TV, most IEDs and other simple devices are easily cobbled together from hardware store parts.

An example: MAPP gas and propane are already sold unregulated and unchecked at hardware stores in handy pint sized containers. Add a magnesium road flare (also available all over the place) to a weakened area of the bottle such that the heat can permeate and ignite the gas, and boom. (Oversimplifying since I don't want anyone to actually make a bomb).

Other types of explosive or chemical weapons can be made simply by mixing household chemicals that are again unregulated.

Making these things isn't hard, just takes some prep and a little googling.


No, it's actually hard. The Shoe Bomber, The Underwear Bomber, the Times Square bomber, that clown who tried to bomb Glasgow International Airport and so on - these are terrorists with actual link to terror groups who can't pull this stuff off.

The reason bomb makers are considered high value targets is because its hard to do it right. There's no evidence to indicate lethal bomb making is a simple task. You're right in once sense - any bozo can make something go "pop." Evidence indicates making it go "pop" in a lethal fashion at a time and place of your choosing is hard. It's just like people who claim that offenders will build their own guns. Right. Building accurate and reliable firearms has never been a cottage industry.
 
2012-12-24 11:16:12 PM
But if we use the Banhammer to ban hammers, how will we ban things in the future???
 
2012-12-24 11:17:09 PM

way south: Champion of the Sun: Legal automatic weapons are already really expensive, about $30k, right?

Marked up by scarcity.
Automatics are legal IF you pass the ATF's checks, IF you pony up for a $200 tax stamp, and IF they are registered with the ATF as machine guns.
In 1986 Charlie Rangal pushed the Hughes amendment into the firearm owners protection act, which closed the list.
(If your wondering why Gun owners buck like bronco's when registration or licencing is mentioned, this is why).

So the only machine guns a civilian can own must be registered before 1986.
Due to damage, loss, and the occasional theft that number is shrinking and prices are always going up.
So $30k doesn't represent the actual value of an AK, just the cost of collecting rare things.

Now bear in mind that AK's are not made in most parts of Africa. They were dumped there by the Russians and others trying to gain favor with local warlords. Many of them were poorly made. You could scoop them up for a few bucks.
The best ones direct from Izenmash/Kalash, probably a few hundred bucks.
Somewhere in between is where you'll buy it at.

Where would you buy it?
Probably the gun free zone of Mexico, which is notorious for the number of weapons stockpiled by the drug lords.
Some of them come from military inventories, some from international arms traders trying to make a quick sell.

Can someone who imports drugs find guns? Yes.
What kinds? All kinds.
Can they get them cheap? Debatable, but I suspect yes.

What we are missing is a black market in the US that would pay for the trouble of importing a rifle rather than, say, ten pounds of drugs.
If you've got a million crooks paying, gun running starts to make more sense.


And the problem with civilian disarmament is that even as you strip away the crimes of opportunity and other gun crimes that come from legally owned arms, you still have a thriving criminal enterprise killing each other and/or killing civilians that get in their way. Look at Chicago. Gun bans hasn't stopped the slaughter, only taken away any advantage the common man has to defend himself while waiting for the cops to bother showing up.
 
2012-12-24 11:17:48 PM

Kit Fister: Dansker: If Mexican criminals have so many guns they could start a large scale black market export business, why do they buy guns in the US?

Convenience. Cartels get guns from a lot of sources. Lower level gangs that don't have the influence and resources import from the US (because we made it possible and easy), while many of the more established cartels either get them from military folks deserting or simply on the payroll, or buy them from countries where manufacture and export is common and not tightly controlled.


You are really not making it sound like they have enough to both fight their own wars and furnish US criminals with hardware.

It's the same method Russian gear ends up in the hands of African warlords

That has more to do with the fact that parts of Africa used to be a proxy battlefield in the Cold War, and both The USSR and the US flooded the continent with cheap Kalashnikovs.

You assume that all of the guns identified and captured in Mexico came from here,

No, I don't. That's just an easily dismantled strawman you constructed for your own benefit.
 
2012-12-24 11:21:14 PM

JungleBoogie: JungleBoogie: Making bombs is hard. The Columbine offenders tried it and failed miserably. Once in a blue moon, a bomber gets it right but it is hard. None of the other weapons mentioned is nearly as lethal as a firearm. The reason combat soldiers are issued firearms instead of hammers and knives is because they are the most lethal weapon available

Kit Fister: Actually, making bombs isn't hard at all. Any combustible of sufficient energy inside of an enclosed container is a bomb. Detonation is often as simple as creating a spark. Despite what you see on TV, most IEDs and other simple devices are easily cobbled together from hardware store parts.

An example: MAPP gas and propane are already sold unregulated and unchecked at hardware stores in handy pint sized containers. Add a magnesium road flare (also available all over the place) to a weakened area of the bottle such that the heat can permeate and ignite the gas, and boom. (Oversimplifying since I don't want anyone to actually make a bomb).

Other types of explosive or chemical weapons can be made simply by mixing household chemicals that are again unregulated.

Making these things isn't hard, just takes some prep and a little googling.

No, it's actually hard. The Shoe Bomber, The Underwear Bomber, the Times Square bomber, that clown who tried to bomb Glasgow International Airport and so on - these are terrorists with actual link to terror groups who can't pull this stuff off.

The reason bomb makers are considered high value targets is because its hard to do it right. There's no evidence to indicate lethal bomb making is a simple task. You're right in once sense - any bozo can make something go "pop." Evidence indicates making it go "pop" in a lethal fashion at a time and place of your choosing is hard. It's just like people who claim that offenders will build their own guns. Right. Building accurate and reliable firearms has never been a cottage industry.


Those guys failed because of scope and special requirements, not to mention the intervention of the FBI in more than one case. Stop lying.

All that a bomb needs to be lethal is proximity. Crowded lunch room and someone manges to make something go pop, people nearby will die.

But you keep on in your delusion. I'm tired of arguing with someone who is closed minded, lofting reasons why not while ignoring alternatives, then belittling the opponents.
 
2012-12-24 11:24:46 PM

way south: Marked up by scarcity.


So if semi-autos were regulated in the same way, the cost of one would be prohibitively expensive for most criminals, right? So we should regulate them, yes?
 
2012-12-24 11:24:57 PM

Dansker: Kit Fister: Dansker: If Mexican criminals have so many guns they could start a large scale black market export business, why do they buy guns in the US?

Convenience. Cartels get guns from a lot of sources. Lower level gangs that don't have the influence and resources import from the US (because we made it possible and easy), while many of the more established cartels either get them from military folks deserting or simply on the payroll, or buy them from countries where manufacture and export is common and not tightly controlled.

You are really not making it sound like they have enough to both fight their own wars and furnish US criminals with hardware.

It's the same method Russian gear ends up in the hands of African warlords

That has more to do with the fact that parts of Africa used to be a proxy battlefield in the Cold War, and both The USSR and the US flooded the continent with cheap Kalashnikovs.

You assume that all of the guns identified and captured in Mexico came from here,

No, I don't. That's just an easily dismantled strawman you constructed for your own benefit.


Not really. The cartels are armed with enough hardware that the only out and out threats they face right now is from military opposition. They have, contrary to popular belief, quite a stock pile. And should arms trading into the US become a growth industry as it is into other countries, they'll add it to the menu more actively. That's a reality based on what we actually know and see, not shiat people make up. However, I suppose since it isn't broadcast on the six o'clock news, you wouldn't know about it.
 
2012-12-24 11:25:44 PM

Kit Fister: and, no, in fact it wasn't caused because a mentally disturbed person got a gun (illegally because he was denied legally), it's because a mentally disturbed person wasn't allowed treatment by his own mom. That she exposed him to guns and denied him medical care even when the dad provided money to cover it is grossly negligent already.


Like I say, the more guns the law abiding have, the more guns criminals will have. All guns are made legally. At some point, they are diverted into the illegal market. The flow of that river has got to be reduced.  You can be the gun manufacturers are going to fight this tooth and nail.

Newton happened because a homicidal person managed to get hold of a firearm. Two more families today are dealing with the loss of a father, because a criminal got guns.

I expect this issue to be obfuscated but anyone who bothers to spend a moment looking at it realizes that these issues happen because a homicidal individual gets a firearm.
 
2012-12-24 11:27:22 PM

Champion of the Sun: way south: Marked up by scarcity.

So if semi-autos were regulated in the same way, the cost of one would be prohibitively expensive for most criminals, right? So we should regulate them, yes?


Regulate them if you want, but semi auto "assault weapons" are rarely used in crimes at all, so it wouldn't make much of a difference.
 
2012-12-24 11:29:37 PM

JungleBoogie: Kit Fister: and, no, in fact it wasn't caused because a mentally disturbed person got a gun (illegally because he was denied legally), it's because a mentally disturbed person wasn't allowed treatment by his own mom. That she exposed him to guns and denied him medical care even when the dad provided money to cover it is grossly negligent already.

Like I say, the more guns the law abiding have, the more guns criminals will have. All guns are made legally. At some point, they are diverted into the illegal market. The flow of that river has got to be reduced.  You can be the gun manufacturers are going to fight this tooth and nail.

Newton happened because a homicidal person managed to get hold of a firearm. Two more families today are dealing with the loss of a father, because a criminal got guns.

I expect this issue to be obfuscated but anyone who bothers to spend a moment looking at it realizes that these issues happen because a homicidal individual gets a firearm.


Well, count me on the side who will actively fight bans in every way possible, and will fight for legislation improving the methods keeping guns out of the hands of criminals without taking them away from law abiding citizens. Good day, sir.
 
2012-12-24 11:29:51 PM

Kit Fister: They have, contrary to popular belief, quite a stock pile.


This seems like a good place to ask for a citation.
 
2012-12-24 11:32:54 PM
Ah, so this is the fault of gun owners too. Not the police/prosecutors/lawmakers who let this piece of garbage out early to make room for minorities.
 
2012-12-24 11:33:55 PM

Dansker: Kit Fister: They have, contrary to popular belief, quite a stock pile.

This seems like a good place to ask for a citation.


http://world.time.com/2012/10/25/mexicos-drug-lords-ramp-up-their-arse nals-with-rpgs/

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h0pATqEwFBWXzWiBA_ 1 OMkAZvkuw?docId=CNG.bdcc466199b06633a4adfe1136197b8b.bd1

http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/cable-honduran-military-sup p lied-weaponry-to-cartels

There ya go, three links covering the source and scope of the arsenals avilable to the cartels.
 
2012-12-24 11:35:02 PM

Fark It: Ah, so this is the fault of gun owners too. Not the police/prosecutors/lawmakers who let this piece of garbage out early to make room for minorities.


Yep, it's always the fault of gun owners, none of these people are responsible for their own actions, and gun owners, by way of supporting legal activities, make them go nuts and kill people.
 
2012-12-24 11:38:05 PM

Benjamin Orr: Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.

Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.


Well, if he shot his mother in the face to get access to the firearms, then he already had a firearm. You liberals just aren't good at logic, are you?
 
2012-12-24 11:41:11 PM
Kit Fister:Making these things isn't hard, just takes some prep and a little googling.

JungleBoogie: No, it's actually hard. The Shoe Bomber, The Underwear Bomber, the Times Square bomber, that clown who tried to bomb Glasgow International Airport and so on - these are terrorists with actual link to terror groups who can't pull this stuff off.

The reason bomb makers are considered high value targets is because its hard to do it right. There's no evidence to indicate lethal bomb making is a simple task. You're right in once sense - any bozo can make something go "pop." Evidence indicates making it go "pop" in a lethal fashion at a time and place of your choosing is hard. It's just like people who claim that offenders will build their own guns. Right. Building accurate and reliable firearms has never been a cottage industry.

Kit Fister: Those guys failed because of scope and special requirements,


These are textbook weasel words. It sounds like you're saying something but you're really just making content-free noise.

Kit Fister: not to mention the intervention of the FBI in more than one case.

Is that so? What case was that?

The Shoe Bomber? Who tried to detonate on a plane?
The underwear bomber? Who tried to detonate on a plane?
The 2010 Times Square bomber? Who was only discovered by vendors?
The Glasgow Bomber? Who was only discovered when he tried to detonate?

Please, I'm curious, let us know which one of these was the FBI involved with setting up, as you insinuated?

Kit Fister: Stop lying.

It's pretty clear who the bullshiat artist is here.

Back to the point - the root causes of Newtown and today were the ability of a homicidal individual to get a firearm. You and others will try to obfuscate but those who are interested in solving this issue and are not dupes of the firearms manufacturers or their paid shills will continue to state these simple, blatantly obvious facts.

And secondly, bombs and other weaponry are hard to use, as illustrated by the failed terror bombings I listed, and their scarcity. If they were so easy, people would be doing them left and right because homicidal individuals want reliable and effective ways to inflict their mayhem.
 
2012-12-24 11:43:11 PM
First of all, I want to say that I live in this area, and used to drive on this road everyday (when the bridge was open), and I had to ask my friends who are firefighters if they were all ok this morning. Luckily none of them were, but 2 died and 2 were injured, killed by a deranged man who should have never been left out of prison.

They said that at his first parole hearing he said he didn't want to go anymore because there was no point. Somehow he was only convicted of manslaughter for his beating death of his grandmother, with a farking hammer.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20121224/news01/312240031 / details-emerge-about-webster-shooter-william-spengler-jr-

This is a critical problem with our prison system is that we are frequently removing prisoners who have no right being released. Inmates should be forced to go through a psych check before release when they commit violent crimes. Homicides such as violent beating deaths, in commission of a robbery, and so on should be mandatory life with no parole at the least.

It doesn't matter the kind of gun or where he got it, all it really does is prove the 'gun nut' point that anyone with any history can get one. Please remember that violent crime with firearms is down almost 50% since 1996 according to the DOJ. (Look it up yourself I'm tired of posting the link).

What happened today was a tragedy, a tragedy that could have been prevented at many, many levels before he ever got to the point of loading a shell in a magazine. So let's all calm down and really start to discuss the heart of the issue, and it's not the guns. How about that?
 
2012-12-24 11:43:53 PM
*Edit for above: None of them were hurt, not none of them were ok. lol. Doh!
 
2012-12-24 11:47:00 PM
Kit Fister: and, no, in fact it wasn't caused because a mentally disturbed person got a gun (illegally because he was denied legally), it's because a mentally disturbed person wasn't allowed treatment by his own mom. That she exposed him to guns and denied him medical care even when the dad provided money to cover it is grossly negligent already.

JungleBoogie: Like I say, the more guns the law abiding have, the more guns criminals will have. All guns are made legally. At some point, they are diverted into the illegal market. The flow of that river has got to be reduced.  You can be the gun manufacturers are going to fight this tooth and nail.

Newton happened because a homicidal person managed to get hold of a firearm. Two more families today are dealing with the loss of a father, because a criminal got guns.

I expect this issue to be obfuscated but anyone who bothers to spend a moment looking at it realizes that these issues happen because a homicidal individual gets a firearm.

Kit Fister: Well, count me on the side who will actively fight bans in every way possible, and will fight for legislation improving the methods keeping guns out of the hands of criminals without taking them away from law abiding citizens. Good day, sir.



Good luck with separating the "wet" from the "water."
 
2012-12-24 11:49:06 PM

Kit Fister: Dansker: Kit Fister: They have, contrary to popular belief, quite a stock pile.

This seems like a good place to ask for a citation.

http://world.time.com/2012/10/25/mexicos-drug-lords-ramp-up-their-ars e nals-with-rpgs/

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h0pATqEwFBWXzWiBA_ 1 OMkAZvkuw?docId=CNG.bdcc466199b06633a4adfe1136197b8b.bd1

http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/cable-honduran-military-sup p lied-weaponry-to-cartels

There ya go, three links covering the source and scope of the arsenals avilable to the cartels.


Thanks, I'll read em when I get up. Even insomniacs have to sleep some times.
Oh, and merry Christmas. Try not to shoot anyone;-)
 
2012-12-24 11:49:42 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: And what law-abiding citizen did he get his gun from?


I'm a bit curious about this too.

You don't get to keep your guns or purchase new ones after you're convicted if a felony in NY, IIRC.

So... did the laws not properly enforced, or did someone with a firearm behave irresponsibly (by not properly securing it), or is it something else?

I'm curious about that stuff, because I'd rather enforce the laws we have than enact new ones. THEN if it's not working, add new laws.

Personally though, I'd rather not have another tragedy occur where we have to ask the question in the first place, but here we are...

/shame the bastage took the coward's way out
 
2012-12-24 11:51:10 PM

phimuskapsi: What happened today was a tragedy, a tragedy that could have been prevented at many, many levels before he ever got to the point of loading a shell in a magazine. So let's all calm down and really start to discuss the heart of the issue, and it's not the guns. How about that?


Mr. Spengler should have been executed for his first murder. He wouldn't have been able to commit these follow-on murderers had he been effectively safed.

And trying to discuss Newtown and the fireman murders without discussing guns is like the tobacco industry calling for a discussion of lung cancer but not wanting to talk about cigarettes.
 
2012-12-24 11:56:01 PM
Obviously new laws are needed to keep people like this from getting guns
 
2012-12-24 11:58:38 PM

Gdalescrboz: Obviously new laws are needed to keep people like this from getting guns


Maybe just one.

To keep the person he got his gun from from getting guns.
 
2012-12-24 11:59:30 PM
Oh look... people in Pakistan making AK47s... and selling them for 80 pounds

Link
 
2012-12-25 12:00:31 AM
www.phrank.com
Gun? Got it covered.
Hammer? You know it.

Came for this, posting to leave satisfied.
 
2012-12-25 12:01:34 AM

ZeroPly: Benjamin Orr: Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.

Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.

Well, if he shot his mother in the face to get access to the firearms, then he already had a firearm. You liberals just aren't good at logic, are you?


Liberal? On social issues I sure am .. not sure how you got that from my post though.

Aren't you the guy that trolled everybody about shooting an AR15 from the hip while shooting an Elk about 20 times?
 
2012-12-25 12:05:19 AM
JungleBoogie: I'm looking to make it as hard for the murderer as possible. If he's gotta use his imagination, if he's gotta expend physical effort rather than just do point-and-click murder, it's likely he will injure and kill fewer people. I'm not looking for perfection, I'm looking for mitigation. I'm looking for improvement. Because right now, gun rights advocates are fighting to hold the status quo. To me, it's like after a plane crash, and the NTSB identifies several failure points. And then the airplane manufacturing industry launches a full PR blitz to avoid making any changes.

way south:
Even with a ban you'll still need guns in society to enforce laws on those who don't comply. What You are attempting is to centralize power among the police, who aren't any less corruptible than normal citizens. So Contraband is likely sneak in and crooks will slip through the cracks.
Guys like this could evade death row and end up living next to you, and there's a good chance they will still get their hands on an illegal weapon such as he did.

If you were his neighbor all these years, would you feel comfortable being disarmed on the theory that it it makes you safer?


No. I wouldn't feel comfortable if he were armed AND I were armed. Because he's a criminal and he'll probably get the drop on me. That's the problem. And just showing him my holstered pistol means he's going to be sitting in his bedroom window waiting for one day when I walk outside unsuspecting.

I would feel more comfortable if he were dead or in jail. If he had to be living beside me, I would only feel slighly comfortable if he were unarmed and I had a robust security system on the house. And yes I would prefer to have the firearm and I would feel safer if he did not. However, this is the conundrum. If it's easy for me get firearms, it's easy for him to get firearms. Because, as you know, criminals don't obey laws. Which is why the manufacture has to be restricted.
 
2012-12-25 12:13:19 AM
And another typical liberal anti-gun thread. All of your gun control ideas have one serious flaw. The guns are already out there and you can not get them back. But that has never stopped the wining.
 
2012-12-25 12:14:56 AM

Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US


The prohibition of slavery has worked pretty well, no?
 
2012-12-25 12:15:38 AM
Nina_Hartley's_Ass

Gdalescrboz: Obviously new laws are needed to keep people like this from getting guns

Maybe just one.

To keep the person he got his gun from from getting guns.


The same logic was/is used with alcohol and drugs. How do liberals understand that the "war on drugs" has made the situation worse but can't apply the same logic to this situation. Likewise, why can't conservatives apply the same logic to drugs. I'll tell you why, its ideology. Whatever your news pundits tell you is what your stance is. Taking my guns from me is not going to help one bit any more than taking alcohol/drugs away from distributors helped/helps. It creates a money and power vacuum that is/will be filled with more violence. The lefts inability to see this is farktacularly impressive as you see it in the "war on drugs" that you biatch about on a daily basis
 
2012-12-25 12:16:36 AM
3 people were arrested today in Indiana for blowing up a house and killing two neighbors BY ACCIDENT! They also demolished dozens of other houses.

Imagine if they were actually trying to kill people and not just burn their own house down for insurance money?

We need to outlaw natural gas being piped so easily into people's homes! Many people who use natural gas for heat are mentally unstable or felons!!!

When gas is outlawed, only outlaws will have gas! (heee heee!)
 
2012-12-25 12:18:15 AM
mamoru SmartestFunniest 2012-12-25 12:14:56 AM


Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

The prohibition of slavery has worked pretty well, no?


Dont use "prohibition," or "prohibit" for that matter, if you dont know what it means
 
2012-12-25 12:21:05 AM

Gdalescrboz: Taking my guns from me is not going to help one bit


I don't want your guns.

I want Nancy Lanza's guns.
 
2012-12-25 12:28:07 AM

mamoru: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

The prohibition of slavery has worked pretty well, no?


Pretty sure that we had to fight a war and then work on race relations for 100+ years (Civil rights era) and are still working on it. Not sure if I would call that simple prohibition.

Some people would argue that we traded one form of slavery for another.
 
2012-12-25 12:29:18 AM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Gdalescrboz: Taking my guns from me is not going to help one bit

I don't want your guns.

I want Nancy Lanza's guns.


I think either the FBI or one of the various CT police forces have them locked up for evidence. Probably will destroy them after its all over with.
 
2012-12-25 12:31:23 AM

clyph: JungleBoogie: Well, to be fair, the death penalty does prevent repeat murder.

If the system actually worked as advertised - convicting only the guilty and releasing the innocent - I'd agree with you.

However, given how many people have been exonerated by Innocense Project (300 freed, 18 from death row), the entire system is suspect. Those are the lucky few where there was DNA evidence available to exonerate them. How many more innocent people are waiting on death row for cases where there is no DNA to test?

Our justice system is founded on the belief that it's better for a dozen guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to hang. We, as a society, have lost sight of our principles in our quest to punish people for increasingly-more dubious "crimes" (EG unauthorized possession of an eagle feather is a federal felony)


There's no credible evidence of the innocent executed. Getting someone off death row on a technicality, or like the Illinois governor did, doing a blanket commutation, is not the same as innocence. There have been a few, very few actual innocence cases where someone was actually innocent and got off death row. But that's exactly what the appeals system is for - it's working correctly. Mostly it's just technicalities and the sentences are commuted. It's happened in Maryland multiple times but the commutations are for wildly guilty individuals, whose sentences are reduced to simple incarceration. The reality is that in order to be executed, one must not only be wildly guilty, but also quite unlucky in order to have the sentence survive through the years of myriad reviews and appeals.

Typically, anti-death penalty advocates will throw out many innocence claims, like throwing a plate of spaghetti against the wall, hoping something sticks, thus leaving it up to the interested individual to check it out. They spent a lot of capital with Troy Davis. And Davis was wildly guilty. The anti-death penalty movement lost a lot of credibility with that one. The only one which has so far not been completely resolved is the Willingham case. Barry Scheck claims all of arson science is wrong. That's what's necessary to believe Willingham is innocent. But even Willingham's wife, who originally thought he was innocent, came to believe he was guilty. He was given the standard reviews, the battery of appeals and was still found guilty.
 
2012-12-25 12:31:28 AM

Benjamin Orr: Mrtraveler01: Is there any gun regulation you would support.

Yes... sensible regulations that would actually make a difference (not cosmetic bullshiat that will never change anything)

One thing would be to make all non licensed person to person sales go through a licensed dealer with the same checks required if you were buying from a dealer. (aka the gun show loophole)

Better funding/reporting for the NICS database to help make sure the existing laws/restrictions for felons and people with mental issues are followed more often.

Tougher sentencing for people with illegal guns or involved in the illegal trade of guns.


Not that it matters much, but those seem like good ideas to me. Too bad the largest, best-funded mouthpiece for gun owners in the USA (the NRA) went full retard. I wish the country could hear more ideas like these from rank-and-file gun owners, not just the NRA.
 
2012-12-25 12:35:44 AM

Evil Canadian: What the fark happened to set this off - I really don't understand at all.


his mother died oct 7th. i'm guessing the sister is dead too.
 
2012-12-25 12:39:07 AM
Mitch Taylor's Bro SmartestFunniest 2012-12-25 12:31:28 AM


Benjamin Orr: Mrtraveler01: Is there any gun regulation you would support.

Yes... sensible regulations that would actually make a difference (not cosmetic bullshiat that will never change anything)

One thing would be to make all non licensed person to person sales go through a licensed dealer with the same checks required if you were buying from a dealer. (aka the gun show loophole)

Better funding/reporting for the NICS database to help make sure the existing laws/restrictions for felons and people with mental issues are followed more often.

Tougher sentencing for people with illegal guns or involved in the illegal trade of guns.

Not that it matters much, but those seem like good ideas to me. Too bad the largest, best-funded mouthpiece for gun owners in the USA (the NRA) went full retard. I wish the country could hear more ideas like these from rank-and-file gun owners, not just the NRA.


I think the NRA is forced to take the wacko stances they do because they are defending themselves from wacko ideas like "ban all guns." Especially when you have media outlets like CNN's Piers Morgan calling gun owners "idiots...who don't care about children being murdered."
 
2012-12-25 01:19:24 AM
2.bp.blogspot.com

Thinks a better choice could be made.
 
2012-12-25 02:19:16 AM

Gdalescrboz: Mitch Taylor's Bro SmartestFunniest 2012-12-25 12:31:28 AM


Benjamin Orr: Mrtraveler01: Is there any gun regulation you would support.

Yes... sensible regulations that would actually make a difference (not cosmetic bullshiat that will never change anything)

One thing would be to make all non licensed person to person sales go through a licensed dealer with the same checks required if you were buying from a dealer. (aka the gun show loophole)

Better funding/reporting for the NICS database to help make sure the existing laws/restrictions for felons and people with mental issues are followed more often.

Tougher sentencing for people with illegal guns or involved in the illegal trade of guns.

Not that it matters much, but those seem like good ideas to me. Too bad the largest, best-funded mouthpiece for gun owners in the USA (the NRA) went full retard. I wish the country could hear more ideas like these from rank-and-file gun owners, not just the NRA.

I think the NRA is forced to take the wacko stances they do because they are defending themselves from wacko ideas like "ban all guns." Especially when you have media outlets like CNN's Piers Morgan calling gun owners "idiots...who don't care about children being murdered."


Forced? I don't know about that. IMO, had they come out with a reasonable solution, they would've gained more credibility immediately, maybe even some support from moderates. As it stands, they've only endeared themselves to gun manufacturers and their members. They aren't going to change a damned thing by playing to their base. Of course, I suppose that's their goal, but the way things are going, there are going to be some gun-oriented regulations coming out of these tragedies. It's just a matter of whether or not those regulations will work.
 
2012-12-25 02:40:59 AM

JungleBoogie: Making bombs is hard. The Columbine offenders tried it and failed miserably.


Making bombs is only hard if you're stupid and can't follow directions. It's not trivial, but it's not rocket science either. Granted, there is a lot of (intentionally) bad information out there in print and on the internet, but finding authoritative information isn't hard.
 
2012-12-25 02:48:20 AM

JungleBoogie: Getting someone off death row on a technicality, or like the Illinois governor did, doing a blanket commutation, is not the same as innocence


Are you at all familiar with the Innocence Project? They use DNA evidence to free people who were wrongfully convicted. There's no farking loophole, unless you consider "it is 100% impossible for the person convicted of this crime to have committed it" to be a loophole. They have saved 300 people, 18 on death row, who were wrongfully convicted and would still be rotting in jail if science hadn't come up with a way to definitively prove their innocence beyond ALL doubt, and if people with consciences hadn't used their own money to make sure that testing got done and then force the courts to acknowledge it.

Pull your farking head out of your farking ass.
 
2012-12-25 03:04:29 AM
This happened in my hometown and one of the victims was an old classmate of mine.
RIP, Chip.
 
2012-12-25 06:22:12 AM

Champion of the Sun: way south: Marked up by scarcity.

So if semi-autos were regulated in the same way, the cost of one would be prohibitively expensive for most criminals, right? So we should regulate them, yes?


Yes, and then the fore mentioned market effect kicks in and makes imported automatic weapons the same price as semi auto.
Weapons imported from other markets are not limited by US regulations.

JungleBoogie: If it's easy for me get firearms, it's easy for him to get firearms. Because, as you know, criminals don't obey laws. Which is why the manufacture has to be restricted.


But this is where the controversy kicks in, because you've got no way to reliably disarm him.
Criminals don't obey laws and, if left with a clear advantage, will simply kick in doors instead of coming up with elaborate plans.

Where it is easier for you to get the firearm but more difficult for him (in a system where instant background checks kick out felons, the system we have) there is a greater risk for him and a greater cost to him. If he can't trick someone into a personal sale and get the gun at book value, his weapon will have to come by theft or straw purchase, which adds a criminal overhead fee.
With that He still does not have an advantage, meaning he'd rather not confront you head on.
He is just another wolf among the wolves.

I believe this could be a reason why he came up with an ambush plan. He wanted to attack firemen for whatever reason, but he knew that walking into a station was a guaranteed failure.
If the men in the station were disarmed by law and this guy decided to walk right in the front door with a pistol, the results would be even more disastrous.
 
2012-12-25 07:01:26 AM

Benjamin Orr: mamoru: Benjamin Orr: Name one instance of prohibition that has worked in the US

The prohibition of slavery has worked pretty well, no?

Pretty sure that we had to fight a war and then work on race relations for 100+ years (Civil rights era) and are still working on it. Not sure if I would call that simple prohibition.

Some people would argue that we traded one form of slavery for another.


You mean people were forced to pick their OWN cotton?

Terrible, just terrible.
 
2012-12-25 07:56:34 AM
Coco LaFemme: He beat his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Why wasn't he still in prison still swinging from a rope?


FTFY
 
2012-12-25 09:26:45 AM
Was he also a father raper and a mother stabber?
 
2012-12-25 10:54:26 AM
When someone manages to walk into a mall or school and kill 20 people with a hammer, I'll consider hammers in the same category as guns.
 
2012-12-25 10:59:13 AM

Circusdog320: Debate willwith rage... massacres will continue



/FTFFarkers.
 
2012-12-25 01:29:38 PM

Rocknutts: I live about 2 miles away where this happened. I don't know if they located his sister yet, but she is probably in one of the houses that burned down. There was a row of houses that were delapidated or boarded up. They sat on multi million dollar property. I thought that it was arson at first.


No, they were not dilapidated and boarded up, they were seasonal homes on Irondequoit Bay, some closed up for the season.  They were all worth a pretty penny.
 
2012-12-25 01:37:04 PM

Rocknutts: I live about 2 miles away where this happened. I don't know if they located his sister yet, but she is probably in one of the houses that burned down. There was a row of houses that were delapidated or boarded up. They sat on multi million dollar property. I thought that it was arson at first.


Dilapidated?  Try $250,000 seasonal cottages.
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/177-Lake-Rd_Webster _N Y_14580_M33835-35033?ex=NY542848221
 
2012-12-25 02:19:44 PM

Amos Quito: GAT_00: Sure am glad he was allowed to buy/keep his gun, depending on when the gun purchase happened.

Yeah, I'm sure he bought it - all nice and legal.


[msnbcmedia.msn.com image 327x380]


Yeah. This guy got his gun either from a douchbag straw purchaser (thanks asshole) or just bought it flat out on the street.
 
2012-12-25 02:21:19 PM
 
2012-12-25 03:49:27 PM

Benjamin Orr: ZeroPly: Benjamin Orr: Somacandra: SquiggsIN: Putting restrictions on legal gun ownership just puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against the nutcases that have no intention of following whatever restrictions are in place anyway.

I guess you're referring to the legally-procured firearms the Sandy Hook mass murderer used? He certainly didn't have any disadvantages to getting his hands on them.

Well he actually possessed them illegally since he wasn't old enough to own handguns, got denied a few days earlier.... and oh yeah.... he shot his mother 4 times in the face to take them.

Well, if he shot his mother in the face to get access to the firearms, then he already had a firearm. You liberals just aren't good at logic, are you?

Liberal? On social issues I sure am .. not sure how you got that from my post though.

Aren't you the guy that trolled everybody about shooting an AR15 from the hip while shooting an Elk about 20 times?



Well, in my defense, you try being facetious in a Fark gun thread. You can post something along the lines of "I only use my full auto on New Year's Eve to fire into the air, and I'm not hurting anyone", and still have people take it seriously. Only true idiots as far as I'm concerned are those who pay $5 a month and accept a content threading and moderation system that would embarass CompuServe...
 
2012-12-25 05:32:54 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/ambushed-ny-firemen-shot-dead-two-police-killed - 015312529.html

[He left a typewritten note describing his intent, Webster Police Chief Gerald Pickering said at a televised news conference.


"I still have to get ready to see how much of the neighborhood I can burn down and do what I like doing best, killing people," Pickering read from the gunman's statement.


Investigators had found human remains in Spengler's burned-out house, where he lived with his sister, Cheryl Spengler, 67, Pickering said. The remains are assumed to be the sister's and a medical examiner will determine the cause of death.


"A CLEAR AMBUSH"


Spengler started shooting at the arriving firefighters before they got out of their fire truck, Pickering said. He shot out the truck's windshield as they tried to drive away, he said.


"This was a clear ambush on first responders," Pickering said. Police fired back at the gunman, he said. "It was a combat condition. They were shooting at muzzle flash," Pickering said.


Spengler was in a natural depression in an embankment near a tree when he opened fire, he said.

His motive for attacking firefighters remained unknown, Pickering said. It may have been related to contributions his mother had made to the local fire department, he said.


Pickering said he was not sure what the victims were shot with, but said Spengler had an "arsenal of ammunition" and three weapons - a Smith & Wesson .38 caliber revolver, a pump-action Mossberg shotgun, and a .223 Bushmaster rifle with a flash suppressor.]


farking shiathead.
 
2012-12-25 07:11:44 PM
Gun control advocates can be glad he beat his mother with a hammer rather than shoot her.
 
2012-12-25 07:37:41 PM

socoloco: Gun control advocates can be glad he beat his mother with a hammer rather than shoot her.


Grandmother, o infromed one.
 
2012-12-26 10:27:54 AM
Actually it was his Grandmother and he was arrested in 1980 and did 19 years. He should have been put to death and then we would have 3 more people in Webster still alive today.
 
2012-12-26 11:22:59 AM

praymantis: Actually it was his Grandmother and he was arrested in 1980 and did 19 years. He should have been put to death and then we would have 3 more people in Webster still alive today.


If he knew he faced capital punishment, he probably wouldn't have confessed and might not even have been convicted, since there were no witnesses.
 
2012-12-26 12:36:34 PM
Actually there was a lot of evidence to convict his ass, he was a piece of shiat who had no business being out of jail. Personally death penalty or life with out parole either way 3 people would still be alive and two would not be in the ICU. Bottom line our justice system failed us yet again.
 
2012-12-26 07:16:52 PM
We should let the crowd have 'em.

No, seriously, let these freaky fricks shoot up the town, if they must, for when the crowd gathers, justice will be meted out.

We should let the crowd have 'em.

After they are captured and dearmed, we deleg them too.

Let the crowd have 'em.

I suspect it wouldn't be long until agoraphobia would eliminate these violent sha/t-h\ards, no?

Who gets to be the first one on him?
 
Displayed 355 of 355 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report