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.

(NBC News)   Four people dead in hostage situation/shootout in Aurora, CO. Sadly, this is NOT a repeat   (usnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 639
    More: Sad, morning, hostage situation, NBC News, KUSA, hostages  
•       •       •

12674 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Jan 2013 at 4:01 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-05 04:56:53 PM
This is what happens when you legalize marijuana.
 
2013-01-05 04:58:01 PM
I just love how libs love to ignore the effectual use of firearms while spouting all of the evil. Look just 30 or so stories back and you see where a mom used a gun to stop an intruder and thus protect herself and 2 children. But I suppose in the liberal mind set, that is just fictional.

Y'all spend so much time panicking about the few gun tragedies that happen, and ignore the huge vast majority of guns and gun owners that NEVER are involved in a tragedy.

FACT: you are not safe, at all, in anything that you do. Life has dangers and you can not eliminate them.

/Not trying to minimize the tragedies that have occurred, every innocent death is a sad loss, but you are focusing on the wrong thing. Violence will happen regardless.
 
2013-01-05 04:58:17 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Bit'O'Gristle: LordJiro: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and gets gunned down while he's getting it from wherever he keeps it, because nobody has their farking gun at the farking dinner table unless they, themselves, are mentally ill.
4. Gunman is more alert, so nobody escapes to get the police.
5. Eventually, he kills them all like sheep.
6. And gets away.

FTFY.

0 / 10. Who said anything about having it right at the table. Moron.

You realize it's more likely Dad is the one who took the hostages in the first place, right?


1. Dad snaps and kills family with gun at dinner table.

Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun
 
2013-01-05 04:58:29 PM

JesseL: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?


fark that basic freedom shiat. it's crap and you know it. want to bear arms? join the goddamn well-regulated militia. until then, stfu or diaf. cuz right now, this shiat is anything BUT well-regulated.
 
2013-01-05 04:59:10 PM

utah dude: once we ban aurora colorado all will be well. is columbine in aurora ?


No, but it's very close, and all are in the Denver area. I suggest a ban on high-altitude living.
 
2013-01-05 04:59:36 PM

LessO2: Mental health and education are always the first to be chopped from the bootstrappy, deficit-reducing types in Government.

Once that stops and we're able to have a rational discussion about gun culture (not necessary control, but CULTURE), will any intelligent thought come out of this.


Or when there's a mass shooting, if the media elects to not publish the name of the shooter and their high chore, but instead focus on the names of the victims (if their family allows them to be released). That may take away the potential notoriety that these shooters are seeking. I'm not looking to restrict the media with legislation, but maybe realize that they're part of the problem.
 
2013-01-05 04:59:52 PM

Farker Soze: But rope isn't meant to kill people, so that makes it all better.


Indeed. I'm sure that was comforting to all those people hung for helping runaway slaves, being runaway slaves, being black in a shiatty town.

Come to think of it, crosses were never meant to be used to crucify people. I wonder if it mattered to the people slowly dying on the cross that crosses weren't meant to be used that way.

All those heretic burned at the stake should have taken cold comfort in knowing that fire wasn't meant to kill and stakes weren't intended to be used this way.
 
2013-01-05 05:00:06 PM
Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-05 05:00:13 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario #2, what do you think the gunman is doing while Dad gets his gun? Capping the rest of the family.
 
2013-01-05 05:00:16 PM
score, not chore
 
2013-01-05 05:00:58 PM

pedrop357: Come to think of it, crosses were never meant to be used to crucify people. I wonder if it mattered to the people slowly dying on the cross that crosses weren't meant to be used that way.


What? Yes they were. That was where the originated. That was the entire f*cking point of them, they were execution devices.
 
2013-01-05 05:01:12 PM

piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun



Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.
 
2013-01-05 05:02:18 PM

mediablitz: sweet-daddy-2: The first one or two threads I made popcorn.Now? Not even worth peanuts.
The same old rehtoric and non-viable solutions.
It's going to happen,one way or the other.Always has and always will.

Truly, the American answer to this issue. Nothing can be done. Why even try?


The American reality is that nothing can be done by society. Only by individuals, and only one at a time. Organized action on such a hot issue is always going to be either ineffective or misguided.

We just have to hope that lots of individuals, including us, acting alone to do what we think is the right thing will be enough.
 
2013-01-05 05:02:47 PM

Felgraf: What? Yes they were. That was where the originated. That was the entire f*cking point of them, they were execution devices.


Good point.

I'll pull the leftwing tactic of shifting goalposts now and point out that wood isn't designed to kill
 
2013-01-05 05:04:52 PM

topcon: Let's freak out about every shooting now, despite the fact gun murders go down every year.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-t h e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[i.imgur.com image 850x397]

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]


These facts get posted in every thread (once or twice by me). Few people seem to care.
 
2013-01-05 05:05:12 PM

pedrop357: piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun


Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.


At least they're still having dinner.

This probably started over an argument over what movie they were going to go see.
 
2013-01-05 05:06:17 PM

buckler: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario #2, what do you think the gunman is doing while Dad gets his gun? Capping the rest of the family.


Maybe because it's stupid and irresponsible fire a weapon into a crowd of screaming people. Bullets don't just magically stop once they enter a human body. Try learning something about what you're talking about if you want people to take you seriously.
 
2013-01-05 05:09:05 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: You realize it's more likely Dad is the one who took the hostages in the first place, right?


mediablitz: the gun was already in the house?



Then who was phone?
 
2013-01-05 05:09:17 PM

duffblue: Maybe because it's stupid and irresponsible fire a weapon into a crowd of screaming people. Bullets don't just magically stop once they enter a human body. Try learning something about what you're talking about if you want people to take you seriously.


And that's one point I was getting at. People think (as I saw in the aftermath of the first Aurora shooting), that they can fire willy-nilly into a crowd of screaming, rushing people trying desperately to escape, and magically only hit the gunman. Thanks for helping to support my point.
 
2013-01-05 05:09:51 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.


Story 3
1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. blows dad's head off when dad runs for a gun
4. kills family

See how your cute little stories don't actually mean anything?
 
2013-01-05 05:09:53 PM

buckler: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario #2, what do you think the gunman is doing while Dad gets his gun? Capping the rest of the family.


It's very doubtful that there were any CCW holders packing in the mall since I've yet to see a mall that allows you to carry your firearm and most CCW holders are law abiding citizens.
 
2013-01-05 05:10:25 PM

brukmann: SN1987a goes boom: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Not that mental health isn't an important issue, but what part of that article gave you any inclination as to the shooter's frame of mind? Sure, you are free to guess about it all you want, but there doesn't appear to be any indication that the shooter was anything more than a criminal as yet.

Anyone who considers shooting hostages an option under any circumstances is mentally ill you farking moron.


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

/Also, if you have to resort to name calling, then your argument is probably BS.
 
2013-01-05 05:11:18 PM

buckler: And that's one point I was getting at. People think (as I saw in the aftermath of the first Aurora shooting), that they can fire willy-nilly into a crowd of screaming, rushing people trying desperately to escape, and magically only hit the gunman. Thanks for helping to support my point.


Crowd and bystander don't stop the police form firing like crazy and hitting everyone else and each other as much as the target. Average citizens? not so much. It should be easy to find all the stories where they shoot an attacker and wound/kill innocent people too.
 
2013-01-05 05:11:22 PM

vudutek: JesseL: vudutek: Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.

Please, explain. Why have these gun-related issues become a discussion ONLY about mental health? Why not discuss mental health programs AND better regulation of guns? And, if mental health is SO important, why are mental health programs being cut to the bone by just about every governmental agency around?

Evil is thinking that more guns is the answer. Evil is thinking that bulletproof clothing for schoolkids is the answer.

Evil is thinking that you can make people safer by taking away their basic freedoms.

Are you going to make it harder for everyone to get instant cold packs, household cleaning products, model airplane fuel, castor beans, or the million other everyday things someone could use to kill a lot of people too?

fark that basic freedom shiat. it's crap and you know it. want to bear arms? join the goddamn well-regulated militia. until then, stfu or diaf. cuz right now, this shiat is anything BUT well-regulated.


#1 According to 10 USC § 311 I am in fact a member of the militia.

#2 The idea that the right to keep and bear arms is predicated on militia service has been thoroughly dismissed by the Supreme Court. It's a non-starter for a legal argument. Give it up.

#3 I'd have the right to own guns even if it weren't protected by the constitution. I'd have that right even if the state explicitly denied it, because it's directly implied by my self-ownership.

Owning myself implies the right to prevent others from infringing upon that ownership by killing, imprisoning, or enslaving me. Having that right to defend myself would be meaningless if I were powerless to enforce it. Effectively defending myself requires tools, and the most effective tools in existence today for defending myself are firearms.

Pass whatever laws you like, but I'll keep my guns.
 
2013-01-05 05:12:04 PM

robodog: It's very doubtful that there were any CCW holders packing in the mall since I've yet to see a mall that allows you to carry your firearm and most CCW holders are law abiding citizens.


And if they're concealed, how would the mall know unless they frisked everyone coming in? Your faith in humanity is charming.
 
2013-01-05 05:12:30 PM

efgeise: Bit'O'Gristle: Story 1.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. Gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone.
3. No way to defend yourself, due to no guns in the house
4. One member of the family gets away, alerting police
5. gunman sees police, kills everyone in the house like sheep
6. cops charge in and gun the shooter until he dies from it.

story 2.

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


/ya ya, i know its not that clear cut, and even with a gun or guns in the house, you still have a chance at getting killed. But...at least you would have a chance at defending your family. And its a better chance than having nothing and just getting shot like a dog.

Story 3
1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. blows dad's head off when dad runs for a gun
4. kills family

See how your cute little stories don't actually mean anything?


The family in story 2 is pretty farked up if they can just go back to eating dinner after witnessing the dad kill a guy.
 
2013-01-05 05:12:31 PM

pedrop357: piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun


Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.


Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)
 
2013-01-05 05:12:35 PM

pedrop357: .

I'll pull the leftwing tactic of shifting goalposts now and point out that wood isn't designed to kill


Haha, yes, it's totally a tactic that only the left wing uses. Right. Please, keep telling yourself that.

For those calling for 'better mental health screening', I do ask a question.

How exactly do you plan to implement this? Pay for it? Are you OK with people being held against their will? What checks will there be in place to make sure those who get committed involuntarily (BEFORE commiting, or attempting to commit, any act that endangers another) are actually insane, and are being evaluated fairly and objectively? (This is actually a HUGE problem. In a science/medical field that is currently almost *Entirely* observation based, observation bias is a dangerous son of a biatch).

And before you go off on me as ONNA DEM GUN GRABBIN LBIERALS!, no. I'm not certain what gun control measures (IF ANY) could, in fact, prevent stuff like this. Or even make them less common.
However, I'd also like those who are super-pro-second ammendment to ALSO be honest. Because I've seen people biatching when news or radio shows claimed that some people purchased the AR-rifles because, well, they thought they were cool! I've seen people going "What, no! That's a horrible mischaracterization, no one does that!"

And yet, bushmaster, you know, *had advertisements* to that very effect. That it should be purchased simply because it was "manly".

So, you know, I'd like some actual goddamn honesty from both sides. And perhaps some attempt to at least understand where people are coming from on different issues. Because, you know what? I can understand why people might feel any form of gun regulation is evil. I disagree, but I can understand where they come from. I'm not seeing a whole lot of that from the other side, but that could be the aforementioned 'confirmation bias' being a biatch.

Or perhaps a bit of honesty and humility from everyone is a bit too much to ask for.
 
2013-01-05 05:13:57 PM

piglet: Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)



Lack of availability of guns doesn't stop the Japanese from killing themselves as much or more as we do.
 
2013-01-05 05:17:21 PM

Bit'O'Gristle:

1. family is at home having dinner
2. gunman comes in and threatens to kill everyone
3. Dad goes for his gun and blows the gunmans head off
4 Dad calls the cops, and they show up with the meat wagon.
5. Family finishes dinner.


i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-01-05 05:17:31 PM
This killed my boner :c
 
2013-01-05 05:17:33 PM

pedrop357: piglet: Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)


Lack of availability of guns doesn't stop the Japanese from killing themselves as much or more as we do.


Yes, but his argument is that a gun is a lot more effective, a lot harder to recover from if people catch you after the fact, and a lot easier to do in the spur of the moment if you have access to one (before you suggest "Jumping off a bridge is hard to recover from and super effective, too!", I wish to point out that very few people own tall bridges within their homes. Nor do many people have trains within their homes, and in theory people can be pulled off the train track-there's likely to be other people around). He has even pointed out he is not anti-gun, he IS pointing out that, yes, they ARE more effective suicide weapons, and that it's stupid, and, quite frankly, dishonest and childish to pretend that they are not.

Do you disagree?
 
2013-01-05 05:18:13 PM

pedrop357: piglet: Or more likely,

1. Family at dinner table mourns son who committed suicide with father's gun


Family at dinner table mourns son who used mom's kitchen knife to slit wrists.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used sister's pain medication to overdose.
Family at dinner table mourns son who used dad's rope to hang self.


The problem is though that, statistically, a gun in a house yields a higher chance of someone committing suicide a gun not in a house. Mainly because the gun offers the (hopefully) quickest and least-painful way of kill yourself.

That said, I am both a fan of mental health help and *smart* gun control. But I doubt either will come about, because A) gun control is inherently bad, according to the NRA, and B) increasing mental health care means spending money on it, and we've all seen how the GOP "dislikes" spending.

So, I don't see either of these problems getting fixed while the current crop of politicians are in place. The current left are too gun-control happy, and the current right are too batshiat to want to fix the problems.
 
2013-01-05 05:18:52 PM

buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario


Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.
 
2013-01-05 05:21:33 PM

JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.


Wishful thinking.
 
2013-01-05 05:23:13 PM

Felgraf: Yes, but his argument is that a gun is a lot more effective, a lot harder to recover from if people catch you after the fact, and a lot easier to do in the spur of the moment if you have access to one (before you suggest "Jumping off a bridge is hard to recover from and super effective, too!", I wish to point out that very few people own tall bridges within their homes. Nor do many people have trains within their homes, and in theory people can be pulled off the train track-there's likely to be other people around). He has even pointed out he is not anti-gun, he IS pointing out that, yes, they ARE more effective suicide weapons, and that it's stupid, and, quite frankly, dishonest and childish to pretend that they are not.

Do you disagree?



I suppose. We'd have to know how often people attempt in countries like Japan, Australia, etc.

If guns are 90% effective here and we have 100 attempts of which 90 succeed, is that better overall then a country where 300 people attempt with a 50% success rate? That means a lot more suicidal, depressed people. Still better to try and deal with the suicidal people and not their tools.
 
2013-01-05 05:23:18 PM

JesseL: buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario

Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.


Citation? (not being snarky, genuinely curious).
 
2013-01-05 05:24:09 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: But god forbid we talk about mental health issues...that would be evil.



Because the right has always considered violence a mental health issue where the perps require hospital care and medication, not prison time.
 
2013-01-05 05:24:25 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.


Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?
 
2013-01-05 05:25:21 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.


That is received wisdom now. I actually read the daily NRA spam, and every time a "fact" like that is included, the gun wankers immediately begin parroting it on Fark.

They've got a whole canon of bullshiat stories and arguments, straight from the NRA.
 
2013-01-05 05:25:35 PM

buckler: JesseL: buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario

Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Citation? (not being snarky, genuinely curious).


http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-1 83 593571.html
 
2013-01-05 05:27:16 PM

Rich Cream: And here's the counter-article about someone shooting a home invader in self-defense. Of course no one can prove the person entering the premises would have killed anyone and a gun stopped them but that's how lopsided the argument is.

Woman shoots alleged home invader in Walton County



This is worthy of quoting.

"According to Walton County Chief Deputy Keith Brooks, the woman was working upstairs when she spotted a man outside the window of her home on Henderson Ridge Lane.  The woman, who was home with her 9-year-old twins, heard the man knock at the door. She called her husband, who said that he wasn't expecting anyone at the house.

The woman said that the man went to his vehicle and returned with a crowbar. The man then forced his way inside and rummaged through the home.
The woman grabbed a revolver fled into a crawlspace with her children.

When the man opened the crawlspace door, she fired six shots with her .38 revolver, hitting the man several times.
"She comes out of the crawlspace and she's standing over the perpetrator, who she says is crying, telling her to stop shooting," said Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman.

The alleged would-be burglar -- now wounded --  fled the house, jumped into his vehicle and attempted to drive away, according to Brooks. He lost control of the vehicle and crashed. Deputies arrived on scene and took him into custody.

The man, identified by authorities as 32-year-old Paul Slater of Loganville, was taken to Gwinnett Medical Center. He is listed in critical condition."

END STORY

Clearly this is a selfish, right wing pigheaded woman who does NOT CARE about the well being of burglars / rapists / murderers, and has NO RESPECT for the families of those who lost their loved ones in Aurora or at Sandy Hook.

SHE IS THE PROBLEM!


/And I'll bet she's racist, too!
 
2013-01-05 05:27:54 PM

JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?


I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.
 
2013-01-05 05:27:54 PM

JesseL: buckler: JesseL: buckler: I had a dream a few nights ago in which I saw a PSA regarding the Oregon mall shooter. In the dream, the guy starts popping off a few rounds, and a few concealed-carriers pull out their weapons on the mezzanine, brace their hands on the rail, and start firing until the gunman is dead. This was followed by a black slate saying "THIS NEVER HAPPENS". It was estimated that there were at least a dozen CCW holders in the mall packing heat at the time of the shooting, yet they served no useful purpose. By and large, I believe the fantasy of armed civilians stopping a shooter are just that: fantasy. In your scenario

Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Citation? (not being snarky, genuinely curious).

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-1 83 593571.html


Interesting, and food for thought. Thanks.
 
2013-01-05 05:28:38 PM

pedrop357: I suppose. We'd have to know how often people attempt in countries like Japan, Australia, etc.

If guns are 90% effective here and we have 100 attempts of which 90 succeed, is that better overall then a country where 300 people attempt with a 50% success rate? That means a lot more suicidal, depressed people. Still better to try and deal with the suicidal people and not their tools.


Where did I, or the original poster, *suggest* that we needed to deal with their tools?

As I said in my earlier post, I'm pissed people aren't being honest, and are just prentending that guns AREN'T effective killing machines, or better for suicicide, etc, like you seemed to be implying.

Why, look! Even in the person's post!

": Guns are just a bit more efficient than the other methods. When my second oldest brother tried to kill himself with pills, he failed and got help. When my other brother tried with a gun, there was no going back.

(Not in truth anti gun, but gun owners are most likely to face tragedy with their own gun. That is pretty clear at this point.)"

Being dishonest about the lethality of guns (and also denying the fact that, yeah, some gun manufacturers have sold their guns angling for the "IT'S COOOOOLLLLL to own this gun! You're not MANLY if you don't own it!) is only going to hurt your cause in the long run.

We're not going to be able to have a discussion about mental health, guns, and how they relate to each other (because, should we, say, improve mental health and remove all restrictions on guns?... even restrictions like, say, checking to see if the person is undergoing depression/on anti-psychotics-etc?), until people can be f*cking honest. And that includes being honest about guns lethality. Even if it makes you uncomfortable. Or makes you afraid that people are going to use that discussion to try to ban it. Or whatever.

/Not to say you were denying the fact that guns have been sold and MARKETED on the cool factor, just that I know a lot of people had.
 
2013-01-05 05:29:01 PM

Felgraf: pedrop357: .

I'll pull the leftwing tactic of shifting goalposts now and point out that wood isn't designed to kill

Haha, yes, it's totally a tactic that only the left wing uses. Right. Please, keep telling yourself that.

For those calling for 'better mental health screening', I do ask a question.

How exactly do you plan to implement this? Pay for it? Are you OK with people being held against their will? What checks will there be in place to make sure those who get committed involuntarily (BEFORE commiting, or attempting to commit, any act that endangers another) are actually insane, and are being evaluated fairly and objectively? (This is actually a HUGE problem. In a science/medical field that is currently almost *Entirely* observation based, observation bias is a dangerous son of a biatch).

And before you go off on me as ONNA DEM GUN GRABBIN LBIERALS!, no. I'm not certain what gun control measures (IF ANY) could, in fact, prevent stuff like this. Or even make them less common.
However, I'd also like those who are super-pro-second ammendment to ALSO be honest. Because I've seen people biatching when news or radio shows claimed that some people purchased the AR-rifles because, well, they thought they were cool! I've seen people going "What, no! That's a horrible mischaracterization, no one does that!"

And yet, bushmaster, you know, *had advertisements* to that very effect. That it should be purchased simply because it was "manly".

So, you know, I'd like some actual goddamn honesty from both sides. And perhaps some attempt to at least understand where people are coming from on different issues. Because, you know what? I can understand why people might feel any form of gun regulation is evil. I disagree, but I can understand where they come from. I'm not seeing a whole lot of that from the other side, but that could be the aforementioned 'confirmation bias' being a biatch.

Or perhaps a bit of honesty and humility from everyone is a bit too much to ask for.


I bought my AR for fun. I hunt deer and shoot targets with it. Both are fun. I will se it in a self defense scenario if that ever happens, but that will not be "fun" in any sense of the word and is very unlikely to happen. Once we see the proposals put on the table we will be able to better respond, but what I have seen proposed will not make us safer - it will just give us a false sense of security until the next mentally Ill person who has fallen through the cracks goes commits a rampage killing with 10-round magazines and pipe bombs or 5-round magazines and a machete.
 
2013-01-05 05:29:12 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.


So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.
 
2013-01-05 05:30:04 PM
Let me make this point again...

THE RIGHT WING GUN NUTS DID NOT CARE ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH UNTIL A BUNCH OF KIDS GOT MOWED DOWN BY A GUY WHO STOLE HIS GUN NUT MOTHER'S LEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS AND THEY HAD NO FREAKING DEFENSE FOR IT!!!

You do not care about mental health. You only care about your f*cking guns! You FOUGHT restrictions that would help prevent tragedies like Connecticut. Claiming the mental health stance (which has been a left leaning policy for ages) as if it's your own NOW is absolutely freaking disgusting!!

But... hopefully the mentally ill can get some help now because of your selfish lies. Just don't start screaming about funding after the spotlight has faded.
 
2013-01-05 05:31:09 PM

ronaprhys: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: JesseL: Nevermind that a CCW holder did in fact draw his gun on the shooter, and though he refrained from firing due to the presence of innocents behind the shooter (good observation of rule 4) it's likely that seeing him is what prompted the shooter to suicide.

Wishful thinking.

Maybe, but not quite as wishful as ignoring the fact that a CCW holder was in fact there and did something because it would fark up a good narrative.

So whats you're explanation for why the shooter chose that time to end his spree?

I don't have an explanation but I'm not making up completely unfounded and unverifiable bullsh*t to support my argument.

So you've not read the link he provided? Good to know.


Quote it.
 
2013-01-05 05:31:42 PM

efgeise: That said, I am both a fan of mental health help and *smart* gun control. But I doubt either will come about, because A) gun control is inherently bad, according to the NRA, and B) increasing mental health care means spending money on it, and we've all seen how the GOP "dislikes" spending.

So, I don't see either of these problems getting fixed while the current crop of politicians are in place. The current left are too gun-control happy, and the current right are too batshiat to want to fix the problems.


Indeed.

My take on the situation is that healthy, well-adjusted, prosperous people are extremely unlikely to commit violent crime regardless of the availability of firearms. By working to improve people's lot in society, a lot of the factors that drive violent crime can be reduced (though never truly eliminated). I'm in full support of measures that provide people with good healthcare (both physical and mental), treating personal drug use as a public health issue rather than a crime, helping people to improve their lot in life, working to get people out of the cycle of multi-generational welfare dependence, gangs, lack of economic opportunity and social mobility, etc. It'll cost money, sure, and I for one think that it'd be money well-spent (assuming it isn't squandered, like so much the government does).

On the enforcement side, I'd much rather see the authorities going after drug smugglers, gun traffickers, and violent criminals than individuals who use drugs for personal use.

Violent crime is a symptom of underlying issues. Treating the symptoms does little if any to treat the cause of the problem.

Alas, I agree that little is going to be accomplished with the current batch of politicians. There's little I can do other than write letters to my members of Congress, even though it's not likely to do much. At least it gives a bit of money to the post office.
 
Displayed 50 of 639 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report