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.

(The Atlantic Wire)   "The next mass shooting will take place on Feb. 12, 2014, in Spokane, Washington, by an emotionally disturbed, 38-year-old white man who will kill 7 people and wound 6 where he used to work using a semi-auto handgun he purchased legally in-state"   (theatlanticwire.com) divider line 208
    More: Strange, semi-trailer trucks, mass shooting, handguns, expected number  
•       •       •

16222 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Sep 2013 at 9:27 PM (42 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-17 10:51:12 PM

bestie1: Mrtraveler01: ole prophet: Mrtraveler01: SithLord: TotallyHeadless: What's with all this "gun free zone" crap everyone keeps spouting? This last one just had the guy shoot a security guard and took his gun. Why is there this belief that the shooters target "gun free zones"? I don't see the pattern to support that assertion.

Because in gun-free zones, the common, law-abiding person is unable to defend himself, instead relying on hired, sometimes incompetent, security if it exists at all.  Schools, theaters, military offices are all "gun free zones" and have been the recent locations of mass casualty shootings.

So how come the Navy Yard shooting didn't happen in one of these "gun free zones"?

Because he grabbed the guns of the only people the government allows to have guns at the location?

Isn't this the exact same thing the NRA wanted to do with our schools to prevent shootings there?

Nice sock puppet work.  Neither statement makes sense so I assume the bud is good at the DNC headquarters.


How so?

The NRA's plan to stop school shootings is to have armed guard stationed in the school just like at the Navy Yard.

Obviously there is a flaw in this strategy.
 
2013-09-17 10:51:20 PM
pbs.twimg.com
 
2013-09-17 10:51:24 PM
I'm so sick of seeing that same old cherry-picked Mother Jones list.
 
2013-09-17 10:52:50 PM
"Looking at the past 30-plus years of spree- and mass-shootings, this is the easiest trend to spot. Nearly two-thirds of the 67 incidents - 65.7 percent - were at the hands of a white person. Only one was committed by a female. It is indisputable: white men are most likely to commit such acts, though not exclusively. "

You grasp of probability and how stats work is, however, very disputable.
 
2013-09-17 10:54:33 PM
The next mass multiple shooting. Knock it off with the mass, massive, massively crap.
 
2013-09-17 10:55:19 PM
newstoshows.com
Just post these two outside of his work in Spokane that day. Everything will be fine.
 
2013-09-17 10:55:37 PM
The article failed to mention the obvious. He will be a polite, but quiet neighbor that kept to himself. Also, he will go by 3 names with a 46.3% chance that Wayne will be in there somewhere.
 
2013-09-17 10:56:34 PM

Mrtraveler01: bestie1: Mrtraveler01: ole prophet: Mrtraveler01: SithLord: TotallyHeadless: What's with all this "gun free zone" crap everyone keeps spouting? This last one just had the guy shoot a security guard and took his gun. Why is there this belief that the shooters target "gun free zones"? I don't see the pattern to support that assertion.

Because in gun-free zones, the common, law-abiding person is unable to defend himself, instead relying on hired, sometimes incompetent, security if it exists at all.  Schools, theaters, military offices are all "gun free zones" and have been the recent locations of mass casualty shootings.

So how come the Navy Yard shooting didn't happen in one of these "gun free zones"?

Because he grabbed the guns of the only people the government allows to have guns at the location?

Isn't this the exact same thing the NRA wanted to do with our schools to prevent shootings there?

Nice sock puppet work.  Neither statement makes sense so I assume the bud is good at the DNC headquarters.

How so?

The NRA's plan to stop school shootings is to have armed guard stationed in the school just like at the Navy Yard.

Obviously there is a flaw in this strategy.

Was it legal to possess that gun in DC?  Did it matter?

Did the perpetrator really go through a security scan or was he allowed through without scrutiny because he had the right govt. ID.  I know the answer to the last part.  I work post 911 for the fed and if you have a badge for the specific Bureau who's building you were entering then you can go through the bypass lanes.  Flash the badge to the desk guard and you are through.
 
2013-09-17 10:56:38 PM

way south: Second we need to understand that, while Government proposes it can control guns, there is never a "we should have done our farking job" follow up. One that covers all of the missed signs and failures to report obvious problems.
This isn't a gun control or background check problem, its a failure to document so existing checks and balances can work.


No kidding.  Jesus, if a server goes down at work for over five minutes we have to write an After Action report demonstrating how we're not going to fark up again.
 
2013-09-17 11:01:21 PM
They're way off, I won't be 38 till June, I am more of a shotgun shooter and I have never been to Spokane, WA.  I don't have plans yet for Feb. 12, 14, so we'll see.

/I'ld rather not
//I'll continue the trend of letting others do it.
 
2013-09-17 11:01:30 PM
Christmas, Salt Lake City, senile Korean War vet, 6 dead, 1 wounded, rocket launcher legally purchased in Somalia.
 
2013-09-17 11:01:53 PM

Mrtraveler01: TotallyHeadless: What's with all this "gun free zone" crap everyone keeps spouting? This last one just had the guy shoot a security guard and took his gun. Why is there this belief that the shooters target "gun free zones"? I don't see the pattern to support that assertion.

They're morons?

From what I heard, anyone in the Navy Yard could carry a gun so hopefully that retarded assumption is disproven and put to rest.

/Doubtful though


Only law enforcement, MP, and those otherwise cleared to carry (high level of clearance req'd for this -- high level officer, secret service, etc...) could legally carry there. This is the same thing that happened in the Ft. Hood shooting. D.C. itself is the last jurisdiction in the U.S. that does not have a pathway to allow legal carry for its citizens. It is in-effect a "gun-free" zone. The base is also a "gun-free" zone. So what we have is the X-Zibit effect.

"Gun free" zones are soft targets. Any place that doesn't allow people to legallycarry and has limited armed security fits this bill. Once inside, a shooter can do as he pleases. Apparently, all this sicko needed was a Remington 870 pump-action shotgun (most popular shotgun in the U.S. and usually never the target of attempted bans) and a decent enough knowledge of where the guards were. The fact that there were so few armed people in a military installation is asinine.

Background checks didn't stop him. D.C's and the Navy's gun restrictions didn't stop him. Ammo capacity didn't stop him. The few armed guards in the building didn't stop him. In the end, it was more guns that finally stopped him -- 30 to 60 minutes after he started.
 
2013-09-17 11:03:21 PM

yourmomlovestetris: "The next mass shooting will take place on Feb. 12, 2014, in Spokane, Washington, by an emotionally disturbed, 38-year-old white man who will kill 7 people and wound 6 where he used to work using a semi-auto handgun he purchased legally in-state......" ~Liberal Media

to which it added after a few-second pause:

"Pleaseohpleaseohpleasewehopewehopewehope pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze don't let it be another person of color or mooslim and don't let it be a gun that was illegally obtained in a city with strict gun laws!! Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze! "


It's pretty clear that someone here is feeling pretty anxious, but I don't think it's the liberal media.
 
2013-09-17 11:03:23 PM
I guess they didn't see the earlier Fark post from tonight about Lansing.

But maybe 4 doesn't count as a "mass shooting" any more in the U.S.
 
2013-09-17 11:05:01 PM
Article was pretty good. Pret-ty good.
 
2013-09-17 11:05:15 PM
White, 48, has probably worked in Spokane, unstable?
You tell me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

/there is a chance
 
2013-09-17 11:05:23 PM
"But as we noted on Monday, the pace of shootings has increased dramatically recently. Since the first shooting in 2004, incidents have occurred about once every 149 days. (This is actually less frequently than they've occurred since 2009 alone. Since Obama became president, there's been a shooting every three months, as noted above.)"

So by using the same sort of logic the author(s) use, it can safely be stated that these incidents have increased while Obama has been in office.  Can we not then inversely attribute this as a causality? Or does using their form of specious statistical analysis and inference not apply in this case?
 
2013-09-17 11:05:24 PM
This is just as racist as someone saying 'if you get mugged, it'll most likely be by a black guy'.
 
2013-09-17 11:05:44 PM

bestie1: djh0101010: It really boggles my mind and/or offends me that my repeated suggestions that we put criminals who use guns in jail for 5 years minimum, typically get NO responses.

Supporters, please comment.  Detractors, please think, and if you have a coherent point, please comment.

I would really love to see a judicial system where criminals who are convicted of crimes, and who used a gun in said crime, would spend 5 years minimum in jail, mandatory.  I'd be interested in ANYONE who can tell me that this proposal would not benefit society.

I'm ok with that.  Make it 20.


20 is fine.  How about death?  I'm fine with any of these. Queue some leftist idiot subterfuging my point, in 3, 2, 1, ...
 
2013-09-17 11:06:37 PM
I can give a "for instance".  My budy worked for DOI.  We reported to work every day and flashed our badges.  When we went up to DOJ to look at a system they were shopping around my buddy raised alarms because of his pocket knife. 
He'd been caring it into DOI for a year because no one ever said you can't do that and no one ever bothered checking.  I could have carried kilos of Peruvian marching powder into MIB whenever I wanted to and no one would have ever checked as long as as I had a DOI badge and that was in 2012 - 2014 or so.
 
2013-09-17 11:07:14 PM

comhcinc: djh01


And there it is.  You don't think these people deserve to die? Am I right?  Can you please justify and explain your point of view?
 
2013-09-17 11:07:17 PM

Mrtraveler01: ole prophet: Mrtraveler01: SithLord: TotallyHeadless: What's with all this "gun free zone" crap everyone keeps spouting? This last one just had the guy shoot a security guard and took his gun. Why is there this belief that the shooters target "gun free zones"? I don't see the pattern to support that assertion.

Because in gun-free zones, the common, law-abiding person is unable to defend himself, instead relying on hired, sometimes incompetent, security if it exists at all.  Schools, theaters, military offices are all "gun free zones" and have been the recent locations of mass casualty shootings.

So how come the Navy Yard shooting didn't happen in one of these "gun free zones"?

Because he grabbed the guns of the only people the government allows to have guns at the location?

Isn't this the exact same thing the NRA wanted to do with our schools to prevent shootings there?


My point is this is the worse case scenario for all parties involved. The guy tried to buy a "scary gun" and was turned away; so he bought a gun that wasn't a "scary gun" killed two people who some people feel should only have guns in what should be the most secure "'Merica Fark Yeah" of all places and continued to kill 12 others.

Both sides really want to drop it and wait to blame the next Teabagger/Muslim/Insane person.
 
2013-09-17 11:08:09 PM

bestie1: I can give a "for instance".  My budy worked for DOI.  We reported to work every day and flashed our badges.  When we went up to DOJ to look at a system they were shopping around my buddy raised alarms because of his pocket knife. 
He'd been caring it into DOI for a year because no one ever said you can't do that and no one ever bothered checking.  I could have carried kilos of Peruvian marching powder into MIB whenever I wanted to and no one would have ever checked as long as as I had a DOI badge and that was in 2012 - 2014 or so.


I meant 2002-2004.
 
2013-09-17 11:09:56 PM
Well it's either that or buy a Valentine's Day gift.
 
2013-09-17 11:11:48 PM

ElFugawz: White, 48, has probably worked in Spokane, unstable?
You tell me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

/there is a chance


or how about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Chase
Neal Chase (born January 30, 1966) is the disputed leader of a small Bahá'í sect known as the Bahá'ís Under the Provisions of the Covenant (BUPC), which was last known to have fewer than 100 members in 1990, mostly concentrated in Montana...

/probably that guy
//then we would get to see people scramble to figure out where we should bomb
 
2013-09-17 11:11:57 PM

Mrtraveler01: SithLord: TotallyHeadless: What's with all this "gun free zone" crap everyone keeps spouting? This last one just had the guy shoot a security guard and took his gun. Why is there this belief that the shooters target "gun free zones"? I don't see the pattern to support that assertion.

Because in gun-free zones, the common, law-abiding person is unable to defend himself, instead relying on hired, sometimes incompetent, security if it exists at all.  Schools, theaters, military offices are all "gun free zones" and have been the recent locations of mass casualty shootings.

So how come the Navy Yard shooting didn't happen in one of these "gun free zones"?


Actually, the shooting happened on a US armed forces base, US Navy Yard, where, because of a law signed by Pres. Bill Clinton, all US Military bases in the USA were declared "gun-free" zones for safety.  The logic being, why would US military people need protection from US military people.  The unintended, (or maybe the intended) consequence of this, is that US Military personnel, trained in marksmanship and safe weapons handling are unarmed targets for terrorists, among others.
 
2013-09-17 11:12:26 PM

Wadded Beef: The vast majority of guns used in mass killings were obtained legally - 81.8 percent. Advocates of gun control will note that this bolsters the case for tighter restrictions, particularly given the overlap between those with mental health issues and those able to buy guns.  Opponents of gun control will note that nearly a fifth of shootings used illegally obtained guns, suggesting that new controls won't prevent such shootings.
 

Well, except possibly four out of five.


Well what we need to do is prevent all legal gun purchases, because, well we all no that nobody is talking about banning all guns, you stupid 2nd amendment freaks.
 
2013-09-17 11:13:51 PM

djh0101010: comhcinc: djh01

And there it is.  You don't think these people deserve to die? Am I right?  Can you please justify and explain your point of view?


I was in prison. I have known people who used guns when they committed crimes. Some were scum some were people who had made dumb mistakes. People deserve a second chance.
 
2013-09-17 11:15:23 PM
And they left out the part where he'll have a history of mental problems but nobody gave a shiat.
 
2013-09-17 11:16:07 PM
Wait, has anyone checked how old the author will be in 2014?
 
2013-09-17 11:18:04 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Wadded Beef: The vast majority of guns used in mass killings were obtained legally - 81.8 percent. Advocates of gun control will note that this bolsters the case for tighter restrictions, particularly given the overlap between those with mental health issues and those able to buy guns.  Opponents of gun control will note that nearly a fifth of shootings used illegally obtained guns, suggesting that new controls won't prevent such shootings.
 

Well, except possibly four out of five.

Well what we need to do is prevent all legal gun purchases, because, well we all no that nobody is talking about banning all guns, you stupid 2nd amendment freaks.


Was it legal to possess even a shell casing in DC?  Did the perp violate the laws by bring the gun to work? 

The real reason he got the gun into the facility was that he was allowed to.  Why was he allowed to?  Why isn't every govt, employee required to pass through a metal detector?  It's not that hard I did it a bunch when I forgot my badge?  What large federal employee organization could actually oppose that kind of safety measure?  It's a mystery!
 
2013-09-17 11:20:16 PM
Sooooooo drive by's and gang shootouts don't count as mass shootings??? I'm sure the PD's of Detroit, Chicago, DC, Atlanta...etc etc blah  blah would disagree.

/CSB Worked with a former Vice squad member in Atlanta who said they would spend new years under a bridge because the gangs in Atlanta had more hardware than the national guard...didn't believe him till I heard the fire on New Years myself...
//Definitely don't go to the Peach drop anymore
 
2013-09-17 11:20:38 PM

Flash_NYC: Actually, the shooting happened on a US armed forces base, US Navy Yard, where, because of a law signed by Pres. Bill Clinton, all US Military bases in the USA were declared "gun-free" zones for safety.  The logic being, why would US military people need protection from US military people.  The unintended, (or maybe the intended) consequence of this, is that US Military personnel, trained in marksmanship and safe weapons handling are unarmed targets for terrorists, among others.


It's like jacking directly into the echo chamber line out feed. No, this is wrong. It is not right. Incorrect. False.
 
2013-09-17 11:22:32 PM
Well I guess we know where and when our next fark party isn't.
 
2013-09-17 11:23:55 PM
Next shooting should be at a Catholic church service in Massachusettes.

Then it could be a Mass. Mass Mass Shooting.
 
2013-09-17 11:26:25 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Flash_NYC: Actually, the shooting happened on a US armed forces base, US Navy Yard, where, because of a law signed by Pres. Bill Clinton, all US Military bases in the USA were declared "gun-free" zones for safety.  The logic being, why would US military people need protection from US military people.  The unintended, (or maybe the intended) consequence of this, is that US Military personnel, trained in marksmanship and safe weapons handling are unarmed targets for terrorists, among others.

It's like jacking directly into the echo chamber line out feed. No, this is wrong. It is not right. Incorrect. False.


Bullshiat.  If you pass the gate with the correct ID your in.  Then it's a soft target inside.  Fix the gate security and harden the inside.
 
2013-09-17 11:28:43 PM
Next shooting will be a Haitian immigrant with a lisp named Alfonso.  He'll use a bugasalt gun to tickle the asses of the nuns of a convent in San Jose.
 
2013-09-17 11:29:24 PM

Mrtraveler01: The NRA's plan to stop school shootings is to have armed guard stationed in the school just like at the Navy Yard.

Obviously there is a flaw in this strategy.



Allow teachers who want to carry concealed to do so.
 
2013-09-17 11:30:46 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Wadded Beef: The vast majority of guns used in mass killings were obtained legally - 81.8 percent. Advocates of gun control will note that this bolsters the case for tighter restrictions, particularly given the overlap between those with mental health issues and those able to buy guns.  Opponents of gun control will note that nearly a fifth of shootings used illegally obtained guns, suggesting that new controls won't prevent such shootings.
 

Well, except possibly four out of five.

Well what we need to do is prevent all legal gun purchases, because, well we all no that nobody is talking about banning all guns, you stupid 2nd amendment freaks.


The problem is, he was smart. He LEGALLY obtained a gun to ILLEGALLY steal guns to cause the most damage. I wouldn't be surprised if this cat died with two middle fingers in the air and the ultimate troll face just knowing he crushed everyone talking points.
 
2013-09-17 11:30:50 PM

knbwhite: Mrtraveler01: The NRA's plan to stop school shootings is to have armed guard stationed in the school just like at the Navy Yard.

Obviously there is a flaw in this strategy.


Allow teachers who want to carry concealed to do so.


Take away TFGs secret service detail and hope for happy puppies to save the world.
 
2013-09-17 11:31:43 PM

djh0101010: I would really love to see a judicial system where criminals who are convicted of crimes, and who used a gun in said crime, would spend 5 years minimum in jail, mandatory.  I'd be interested in ANYONE who can tell me that this proposal would not benefit society.


So someone who bags a deer without the correct tag would get 5 years in jail?

Or how about someone at an airport in New York state who didn't understand that they can't check in their pistol as they do in their home state? Happens all the time. 5 year minimum for them?

The person who proposed blanket rules such as this, is generally not the type who thinks deep, or considers the entire spectrum of possibillities.
 
2013-09-17 11:32:33 PM
When it's over I will be at Mootsy's.
 
2013-09-17 11:33:21 PM
The "cost" of gun ownership is still worth it.
 
2013-09-17 11:33:41 PM

corronchilejano: AverageAmericanGuy: You'd only be able to predict something like that if you were the shooter or you had information about the government's conspiracy to fan the flames of anti-gun sentiment and fear.

Or be cheap and average every single piece of data you can... because science... which is exactly what they did.

People don't actually understand how this math thing works.


Exhibit A.
 
2013-09-17 11:36:53 PM
Fark, Mother Jones and the left-leaning Internet "news" organizations are flogging the crap out of this data set Mother Jones has built. We've got another article based on it sitting the queue.

It's a horrendously flawed dataset, and it doesn't prove what everyone and their mother is claiming it proves.

Not to mention the horrendous approach to "statistics" taken in the article - an undergraduate could do a better job of analysis than this.

I don't mind legitimate debate on gun control but this dataset and all of the commentary that goes with it is atrocious.
 
2013-09-17 11:37:39 PM

bestie1: Bullshiat.  If you pass the gate with the correct ID your in.  Then it's a soft target inside.  Fix the gate security and harden the inside.


This was not a gun free zone. The gunman shot a security guard and then took his handgun. Military bases are not gun free zones.
 
2013-09-17 11:39:44 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Flash_NYC: Actually, the shooting happened on a US armed forces base, US Navy Yard, where, because of a law signed by Pres. Bill Clinton, all US Military bases in the USA were declared "gun-free" zones for safety.  The logic being, why would US military people need protection from US military people.  The unintended, (or maybe the intended) consequence of this, is that US Military personnel, trained in marksmanship and safe weapons handling are unarmed targets for terrorists, among others.

It's like jacking directly into the echo chamber line out feed. No, this is wrong. It is not right. Incorrect. False.


A: You linked to a site with pop up shiat soooo.....
B: http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r190_14.pdf  I suppose we blame that one on Bush eh?
 
2013-09-17 11:40:57 PM

SithLord: TotallyHeadless: What's with all this "gun free zone" crap everyone keeps spouting? This last one just had the guy shoot a security guard and took his gun. Why is there this belief that the shooters target "gun free zones"? I don't see the pattern to support that assertion.

Because in gun-free zones, the common, law-abiding person is unable to defend himself, instead relying on hired, sometimes incompetent, security if it exists at all.  Schools, theaters, military offices are all "gun free zones" and have been the recent locations of mass casualty shootings.


Correlation doesn't prove causation. Is there proof that the reason shooters pick those locations because they are "gun free zones"? Or could it be for another reason such as these places are crowded with a lot of people? Or that these places represent something that the shooters have a perceived grievance against?  Just saying that "gun free zones" are the issue is not convincing.

Also, when is the last time someone check for guns at a theater? Nobody would know if you had a gun or not.
 
2013-09-17 11:41:03 PM

djh0101010: It really boggles my mind and/or offends me that my repeated suggestions that we put criminals who use guns in jail for 5 years minimum, typically get NO responses.

Supporters, please comment.  Detractors, please think, and if you have a coherent point, please comment.

I would really love to see a judicial system where criminals who are convicted of crimes, and who used a gun in said crime, would spend 5 years minimum in jail, mandatory.  I'd be interested in ANYONE who can tell me that this proposal would not benefit society.


Move to Florida. Mandatory 10-20-life for felonies committed with a gun.
i.imgur.com

Something tells me most Farkers would object to modeling their state's laws on Florida law, however.
 
2013-09-17 11:44:24 PM

ignoramous: B: http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r190_14.pdf  I suppose we blame that one on Bush eh?


I'm not sure what you think this says. The gunman shot a security guard and took his gun. Because it wasn't a gun free zone. Military bases are not gun free zones.
 
Displayed 50 of 208 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report