Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(MIT) NewsFlash MIT advising people to "shelter in place" after reports of a person with a long rifle and body armor on campus (UPDATE: report "unfounded")   ( emergency.mit.net) divider line
    More: NewsFlash, shelter in place, MIT, long rifle, Cambridge Police  
•       •       •

7122 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Feb 2013 at 10:12 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-02-23 10:14:40 AM  
3 votes:
This is why people try to take away our nice things.
GBB
2013-02-23 10:19:20 AM  
2 votes:

lenfromak: At MIT, the kid likely built 3D printed all of it himself.

2013-02-23 02:34:58 PM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: If you are truly Pro Life, you are NOT pro-gun.


So if you are truly pro choice you are NOT pro assault weapons ban? Because that sentence actually makes sense.
2013-02-23 12:12:11 PM  
1 vote:

misanthropologist: Thanks for the thought-provoking response!


Honestly, I'm shocked that you answered.  While we're talking, can you help me out with one more question that's been bugging me for a long time:  Fast food, cigarettes, and alcohol kill more Americans before breakfast every day than gun murders do all year.  If you're just looking to save lives, by the numbers, it seems like that's where the low-hanging fruit is.  Why don't we have a million moms marching on Washington (...or whatever...)about that?
2013-02-23 12:12:08 PM  
1 vote:
Apparently, MIT students can't discern the difference between a janitor in coveralls with a broom and a gunman holding a rifle.

I thought they were supposed to be super-smart?
2013-02-23 12:10:19 PM  
1 vote:

misanthropologist: clowncar on fire: misanthropologist: clowncar on fire: Princess Ryans Knickers: 2189 gun deaths in United States alone since Sandy Hook and counting

And how many are left when you take out suicide and accidental shootings?

Is the argument here that without guns, suicides will happen at the same rate? And that without guns, accidental deaths will happen at the same rate?

I suppose it's fair enough that people who want to commit suicide should be allowed to do it by the most efficient and effective means. We wouldn't want them to fail and accidentally survive or something, and then eventually get out of their depression or whatever situation led them to attempt suicide and live productive and fulfilling lives. People who attempt suicide should be assisted in their efforts, because that will make more room for the rest of us to thrive. Right?

And those accidental shootings, well, that's just technologically facilitated Darwinism. Those people would inevitably find another way to accidentally die, ideally before they go and reproduce and pass on their accident-prone genes. We should make sure that everyone has a gun so that gun accidents help to weed out the ignorant and weaker members of society, leaving only the strong and intelligent. Right?

There are more reasons for better gun regulation (and regulation is more than just passing laws...) than just murders.

Bubble wrap laws- welcome to the Nanny States of America where primary govermental function is to enact law to protect us from ourselves.  Oh, and let's not look into too many issues where the individual citizen may have to recognize they have only themselves to blame and that maybe, all the government intrusion in the world is not going to fix.  You know, cause it's always someone elses fault.

So, essentially, you're confirming my interpretation of your desire to separate out suicides and accidental gun deaths from the list of total gun deaths because they're not a real problem? And the risk of accidental ...


Suicide is one of many of life's little ills- as are gun related deaths.  The difference is taking one's life has taken so much more of a toll on society and is, in some sense, a reflection of how healthy that society is and how well that government is representing it. Failed society = failed government.  People shooting other people is not all that high on why our society is failing- albeit it may actually be a symptom of that failure.  The reality is that our leaders are either clueless as to what has happened to cause this breakdown ,or feel powerless to make the changes needed, so they instead engage themselves in the trivial feel good pursuit of regulation over the things they think they can manage (worked out well in prohibition and regulation of narcotics) as opposed to addressing real issues.

People don't shoot themselves because they have accessibility to guns- they take their lives because they believed they have failed (either in truth or in psychosis) and that they must pay or that death is th only release from a painful life.  How can the government get involved to make us all feel better about our selves?  One is to recognize that the individual is often the master of their own fate and quit supporting the idea that others determine your fate and that only the govermnet can protect you and save you from yourself.  You cannot raise a child successfully through dependency and cocooning them in bubble wrap and then expect them to handle the realities of life the first time they step out from under their wing, why would you expect any different from a society raised under the same conditions?

Kids don't get fat from the accessibility of coke- it's because they have parents who refuse to tell their kids no or place limitations.  Regulating coke only relieves dumbass parents from their responsibility of controlling their child's intake of sugar.  But yes, I guess its a hell of a lot easier to regulate a business (who you hold by the short hairs in the form of re-licensing) than to tell your constituency that they need to be better guardians of their kids.
2013-02-23 12:07:11 PM  
1 vote:
Just up the street.

home.earthlink.net
2013-02-23 11:32:33 AM  
1 vote:

misanthropologist: iheartscotch: You'd think people who obviously like personal freedoms would support all personal freedoms; not just the ones that they, personally, like.

I feel that is what makes America great; the power to make choices. Can there be a right or wrong if you never had a choice?

You'd think people who like sex would support all types of sex, not just the ones that they, personally, like. For example, I like sex with women, but if liking sex with women implies liking all kinds of sex, I'd have to also support people who like to have sex with children, or who like to have sex with animals, or who like to have sex with people against their will. That's the logic you're applying here.

We can make distinctions between activities and values, and we can negotiate and debate which ones are acceptable and which ones are not. We are, after all, humans, and that is what humans do that distinguishes us from other animals. But if we're going to do that well, we need to look at the real effects of various activities and value systems in terms of people's lives, the environment, etc., etc., etc. If we find that an activity or value system has effects that we do not find tolerable, we should try to change those activities or value systems to minimize or stop the intolerable effects all together. We are not bound to accept any and all beliefs and practices as morally or empirically equivalent and valuable just because they exist in the world.


My my; I was all personal freedomy and you were all sex with turtlesy.

Gun ownership is in The Bill of Rights. I feel that it sets a very bad precident to null and void one of the rights laid down in The Bill of Rights; why not null and void another when it becomes inconvenient?

I know, I know; militia, militia, militia! Gees, jan; a little jealous? All they'd have to do is start a nonpaying state militia; any noncriminal can join for free.
2013-02-23 11:18:52 AM  
1 vote:
Guns allow small powerless people to defend themselves from big angry people.  It is an equalizer.
2013-02-23 11:05:29 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: If you are truly Pro Life, you are NOT pro-gun.


Really?  Because one of the biggest Pro-Life organizations in the world even allows for violence, yes, even gun violence, if the situation warrants it.

Bellum iustum:

Jus ad bellum:
-Just Cause
-Right Intention
-Last Resort
-Significant Probability of Success
-Proportionality

Jus in bello
-Discrimination
-Proportionality

/I'll let you do the research, if you have questions
//I've already taken plenty of classes on it
2013-02-23 10:58:57 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: If you are Christian than you shouldn't need a gun. Didn't Jesus say unto you that if you would just believe in Him that you would always be safe? Did He not say to lay down your swords (guns)?


I'm Muslim. My god says to kill everyone who doesn't agree with me.

NOW WHAT BIATCH?

COME AT ME INFIDEL!
2013-02-23 10:55:40 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: If you are truly Pro Life, you are NOT pro-gun.


TROLLOLOLOLOLOL
2013-02-23 10:55:40 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: Giltric: Princess Ryans Knickers: 2189 gun deaths in United States alone since Sandy Hook and counting

How many murders?

Which part of gun death did you not understand? Always amazed at how many claim to be Christian but ignore Christ when it comes to weapons and violence.



You didn't answer the question but instead went for maximum deflection.
2013-02-23 10:54:18 AM  
1 vote:

Generation_D: There's two stories with regard to crime and guns.

1) Over all crime is down, but

2) Random nutjob attacking with assault weapons is way up since 2004.

It can be both. And both can be addressed, if the gun nut crowd would compromise an inch on various common sense regs.

But if they don't, I'd bet the eventual resulting laws will be worse. The gun nut crowd digs in its heels, which forces everyone else to dig in ours. And we outnumber the gun nuts.



The rate of incident remains pretty steady. The thing that varies greatly is the number of victims.

Handguns are used in more mass shootings than rifles.
2013-02-23 10:52:08 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: Giltric: Princess Ryans Knickers: 2189 gun deaths in United States alone since Sandy Hook and counting

How many murders?

Which part of gun death did you not understand? Always amazed at how many claim to be Christian but ignore Christ when it comes to weapons and violence.


So the suicides cut down the numbers too much for you?
2013-02-23 10:51:41 AM  
1 vote:

Generation_D: There's two stories with regard to crime and guns.

1) Over all crime is down, but

2) Random nutjob attacking with assault weapons is way up since 2004.

It can be both. And both can be addressed, if the gun nut crowd would compromise an inch on various common sense regs.

But if they don't, I'd bet the eventual resulting laws will be worse. The gun nut crowd digs in its heels, which forces everyone else to dig in ours. And we outnumber the gun nuts.


By 'way up' how many victims are we talking about?  100?  200? Out of how many guns?  250M or something?
2013-02-23 10:46:12 AM  
1 vote:
There's two stories with regard to crime and guns.

1) Over all crime is down, but

2) Random nutjob attacking with assault weapons is way up since 2004.

It can be both. And both can be addressed, if the gun nut crowd would compromise an inch on various common sense regs.

But if they don't, I'd bet the eventual resulting laws will be worse. The gun nut crowd digs in its heels, which forces everyone else to dig in ours. And we outnumber the gun nuts.
2013-02-23 10:45:05 AM  
1 vote:
Somebody had a test they didn't study for?
2013-02-23 10:44:57 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: 2189 gun deaths in United States alone since Sandy Hook and counting


And how many are left when you take out suicide and accidental shootings?
2013-02-23 10:44:12 AM  
1 vote:

Princess Ryans Knickers: 2189 gun deaths in United States alone since Sandy Hook and counting


How many murders?
2013-02-23 10:38:58 AM  
1 vote:
who the hell is awake on a college campus at 10 in the morning on a saturday anyways?
2013-02-23 10:37:39 AM  
1 vote:

potterydove: You know what defeats standard body armor?

[www.aimsurplus.com image 480x312]



That is anywhere from a 2 to 4 MOA round. What you want is more like this:
www.snipercentral.com
2013-02-23 10:36:25 AM  
1 vote:

misanthropologist: potterydove: You know what defeats standard body armor?

[www.aimsurplus.com image 480x312]

And this is precisely why the argument that more guns equals less gun violence breaks down. If everyone is armed, mass shooters will start wearing body armor (oh, wait, that has already started happening...), so everyone will want to carry armor piercing rounds, which will lead to more adaptation and escalation of armor and weapons, until we're all running around with rocket launchers mounted on our armor plated personnel carriers.


And this is why the argument for more gun control breaks down. Gun ownership has been steadily rising, and crime overall (including gun deaths) has bee steadily decreasing.
2013-02-23 10:32:18 AM  
1 vote:
We need to ban telephones.  Clearly, some phone-nut went crazy and called in a threat when none existed.  Phones now-a-days are powerful.  They're fully autodial, with the ability to conference call by voice command.  That's too much phone.

/Seriously though, handguns do all the killing in the U.S.S.A.  Why all the talk about rifles?
2013-02-23 10:31:43 AM  
1 vote:

WorkingInParadise: CreampuffCasperMilktoast: Even though police haven't found anything, a lone cameraman may have caught something in his lense....

[z.about.com image 400x573]

/is that an "Assault Rifle" strapped to his back?

Wookies don't carry assault rifles, they carry bandoliers.


Fail. Turn in your nerd badge, tourist.

Hint: The word you're looking for is "Bowcaster".
2013-02-23 10:28:44 AM  
1 vote:
According to police: Scene is clear. Call unfounded. No threat to public safety
2013-02-23 10:23:01 AM  
1 vote:

lenfromak: At MIT, the kid likely built all of it himself.


I don't know.  Those kids seem more likely to build dirty bombs or thermonuclear devices when they snap.  They seem a little too smart to be part of the point and shoot bullets crowd.
2013-02-23 10:22:34 AM  
1 vote:
It's not even real.
2013-02-23 10:22:03 AM  
1 vote:

BlippityBleep: everybody pointing at guns while ignoring the previous two issues?  check.  lulz.


What do you mean "everybody?"

NYS just put in place a gun law that strengthens mental health reporting.

lulz indeed. I love my state.
2013-02-23 10:20:54 AM  
1 vote:
You know what defeats standard body armor?

www.aimsurplus.com
2013-02-23 10:18:42 AM  
1 vote:
www.studiohowell.com
2013-02-23 10:16:37 AM  
1 vote:
"A gun-free zone?"

How's that workin' for ya, MIT?
2013-02-23 10:16:36 AM  
1 vote:
It is Massachussetts. More than likely it is someone carrying a broom handle wearing a flyfishing vest.
2013-02-23 10:16:31 AM  
1 vote:
My bet is it turns out to be a person with a walking stick and a puffy insulated vest.
2013-02-23 10:16:03 AM  
1 vote:
Release the battlebot army. You know they have one.
2013-02-23 10:15:25 AM  
1 vote:
Slow news day?
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report