MutaThe shooter probably went there because the mall is a gun free zone. Had everyone been armed everyone would have been safe.
Fark It: Police said one of the victims was found near a gun and ammunition.
GwendolynMy kid is on a date at the AMC theater there right now. Sooo I'm freaking out quite a bit.
Doom MD: I'm ok with universal background checks in exchange for a repeal of the Hughes amendment and nationwide ccw reciprocity. I've mentioned this several times in these types of threads but I've never had an anti bite, they just respond with further impingements. Their disarmament agenda and monopolization of violence in the hands of the government are plain as day. What good little statists.
Clutch2013: So every sign in the world seems to point to a domestic issue gone horribly wrong, and CNN is still losing their got damn* minds over this.Question: would there be this much attention if it had happened in their home, for example?/*yes, I meant it exactly like that
lordjupiter: Clutch2013: So every sign in the world seems to point to a domestic issue gone horribly wrong, and CNN is still losing their got damn* minds over this.Question: would there be this much attention if it had happened in their home, for example?/*yes, I meant it exactly like thatI know, right! And would there be this much concern if it was a nerf gun and everyone was OK? Sheesh!
OnlyM3: GwendolynMy kid is on a date at the AMC theater there right now. Sooo I'm freaking out quite a bit.So your daughter is at a crime scene and your first move is see if you can score some political points and get a green-light on fark?Love is grand.
Daedalus27: Great Porn Dragon, I like the proposal and in an ideal world, it would be a great compromise and acceptable to all. The problem is we don't live in an ideal world. With hundreds of millions of firearms already in circulation, any restriction would take time to have an effect. In the meantime firearms would continue to be misused therefore triggering the scenario that Kensey suggested of misusing the law to actually restrict sales to everyone. It is like the CCW permits in certain counties in California where theoretically they are available to the public, but the officials never actually issue them unless you know the Sheriff and other political figures and donate enough to their reelection that they allow you to have a permit while other counties have a more permissive issuing of permits if you meet the requirements.Put it another way with a RL example, what about literacy requirements for voting so we can be sure the electorate can meaningfully participate. These were common in the south and although on paper could be justified, were applied to restrict minority participation in voting. A seemingly reasonable idea was perverted to become an unreasonable method to remove individuals from exercising their right. Given the diverse opinions firearms ownership and use, I could easily see a training, mental health, or other "reasonable" restrictions morph in certain states and jurisdictions to become a high hurdle that no one could meet.I will give you another example. In California, the legislature passed a law in 2007 that requires new handguns to incorporate microtagging the serial number, model, and make on any bullets fired from a weapon after the technology became viable (which was found this year) to facilitate law enforcement dealing with crime. While technically feasible, the technology is not economically viable and handgun makers are leaving the market instead of complying with law. This "reasonable" restriction is driving companies from the market and will reduce consumer choices acting as an effective ban on many types of handguns. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/01/24/smith-wesso n -protests-california-gun-law/The skepticism that firearms owners and those who want the freedom to purchase firearms have is that "reasonable" restrictions have a nasty habit of expanding so that they may become viewed as unreasonable and utilized to restrict the ability to meaningfully own weapons. That is not to say that no restrictions are acceptable, but the history of using restrictions to remove firearms from private ownership makes even the most benign new law subject to harsh criticism and skepticism. I wish this weren't true, but the opponents of gun ownership have only themselves to blame by overreaching when they have had the opportunity to impose new laws.
Pichu0102: Can we talk about handgun control yet, or will that cause the NRA to completely shiat themselves? At the very least, figure out some way to reduce the new guns:destroyed or unusable ratio so that we have less new guns being made than than those that are destroyed due to various reasons. Starve supply a bit, and raise the prices on them. Cheap available guns are a blight on poor neighborhoods.
Daedalus27: Sorry Clutch2013, the shell casing. Putting that on the bullet would likely lead to it being destroyed.
Clutch2013: Daedalus27: Sorry Clutch2013, the shell casing. Putting that on the bullet would likely lead to it being destroyed.That's only marginally better. I'd still like an explanation as to how it works without losing the tag when the gun's fired.
ultraholland: dang, I bought some skateboard trucks there back in July. I'm curious to see which employees were killed.
SRD: This ones scary please close your eyes for the firearms sensitive.
lordjupiter: ultraholland: dang, I bought some skateboard trucks there back in July. I'm curious to see which employees were killed.CNN just gave the names and then went right back into a stereotypical gun control debate.
StreetlightInTheGhetto: mschwenk: Do you need a computer, or a TV, or a cup of coffee?I'm seriously asking. What purpose is there, other than "it's fun to shoot at stuff (fair enough)" or "because I want it", or preparing for some attack in which you'll surely be lauded as a hero? When so much damage can be done by those who pick "shoot other people" as a reason, why can't you accomplish whatever purpose you have with something else? That might be a bit slower? So that way someone with a nefarious purpose (not any of you, of course, you're all sane and responsible) might kill just a few less people before the cops show up? Or have to reload a bit more often, providing a chance to stop him (or I guess her)?I was in college after 9/11. We had multiple labs delayed and one facility closed entirely because of tightened security. Yep, the professors definitely had the right to access the materials they needed to do the research they were doing. But because a dumbass could do real damage, they worked within the new system, had backup labs prepared, etc.Could a asshole intent on hurting other humans still obtain those materials or their equivalents from other places? Yeah. But it would take a lot more effort for something nowhere near as damaging.
storm16: Pichu0102: Can we talk about handgun control yet, or will that cause the NRA to completely shiat themselves? At the very least, figure out some way to reduce the new guns:destroyed or unusable ratio so that we have less new guns being made than than those that are destroyed due to various reasons. Starve supply a bit, and raise the prices on them. Cheap available guns are a blight on poor neighborhoods.But why? Virginia, right next door, has seen gun crime decrease because of increased gun sales:http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/state-regional/va-gun-crime-drops- ag ain-as-firearm-sales-soar/article_a9a3cd36-dc50-5192-9b97-e14258e6168a .htmlMeanwhile, Maryland has issues like this, because they are generally hostile toward guns and legal gun owners, first by charging a homeowner for murder when some guy kicks his door in at 2am and he shoots him:http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/maryland-man-matthew-pin ke rton-faces-murder-charge-after-shooting-intruderThen by harassing an out of state driver because he has a legal concealed carry permit:http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/17/Florida-Gun-Owner -W ith-No-Gun-Pulled-Over-Searched-And-Humiliated-In-MarylandGetting rid of legal gun owners' rights is not going to stop incidents like this. So no, taking away our Constitutional rights is not the answer. Remember, criminal love gun control because it makes their job safer.
Nemo's Brother: To the statist, only the government can respond to a crisis.
Pichu0102: Criminals' guns don't spawn from a void, you know.
Triumph: Cops have a robot in there checking the shooter for booby-traps like he's the Joker.
plutoniumfeather: Clutch2013: Daedalus27: Sorry Clutch2013, the shell casing. Putting that on the bullet would likely lead to it being destroyed.That's only marginally better. I'd still like an explanation as to how it works without losing the tag when the gun's fired.the firing pin micro-imprints something on the primer when the bullet is fired, or something like that . . . so the empty shell casing can be tied to the gun. solution: use a revolver -- no shell casings to litter the crime scene. the DC police test-fire every weapon a civilian registers so that they can "match" the marks found on a fired bullet picked up at a crime scene with their library. solution: clean your barrel, or use frangible ammo.
zamboni: cameroncrazy1984: zamboni: Kensey: Dimensio: fluffy2097: KIA: Didn't Maryland just make all that shiat illegal? What a bunch of criminals!It's almost as if criminals were people who didn't follow the law!/We should make a law to stop them.Obviously, current firearm laws are insufficient. The state recently enacted an "assault weapons ban"; that this incident occurred is demonstration that the "ban" should be expanded to all semi-automatic rifles.Difficulty: the shooter apparently used a shotgun.It matters not one whit. There is a time for action and a time for thinking... and this, my friends, is no time for thinking.You're right! We should slowly think about things while we continually reset the clock on when it is time to talk about reasonable gun legislation in this country.We already have reasonable gun legislation. The issue on the table is now unreasonable, draconian gun legislation.We have two people shot in a country of... approaching 320 million... and it's time to wet our pants in fear. Unreal.
Gecko Gingrich: Pichu0102: Can we talk about handgun control yet, or will that cause the NRA to completely shiat themselves? At the very least, figure out some way to reduce the new guns:destroyed or unusable ratio so that we have less new guns being made than than those that are destroyed due to various reasons. Starve supply a bit, and raise the prices on them. Cheap available guns are a blight on poor neighborhoods.News reports say it was a shotgun.
nekom: Now isn't the time to talk about gun violence again.
Parthenogenetic: The liberal mainstream media never covers the millions of times when law-abiding armed citizens go to malls and movie theaters and don't shoot anybody.Go ahead and panic, sheeple. The regime and its media allies want you to think we're the enemy, but we're the thin line of heroes that separates you from tyranny.
super_grass: fluffy2097: Kit Fister: This just in, farked up people do farked up things. Film at 11./exhibit A: the Politics tabBreaking news. Social unrest on the rise. Scientists unsure if the rise in violence is attributed to; A widening gap between rich and poor, A lack of affordable education, over a decade of being at war, Gang activity, Racial tensions, drug use, video games, a lack of decent healthcare, increased unemployment, global warming, Gender inequality, or listening to Maralyn Manson./It's more about why WOULDN'T you want to kill a bunch of people and then yourself these days.//Permanent solutions to temporary problems. The American way.Violent crime and crime in general has been plummeting:Which makes the media's obsession with various crime "epidemics" all the more troubling.
super_grass: cameroncrazy1984: super_grass: But what actually happened isn't important. It's how we must feel. We need to feel outraged, we need to feel that something must be done, we need to demand immediate action regardless of detractors who want us to get off the emotional high and strike while the iron is hot.That's what matters.Awesome strawman, dude.No, it's not a strawman.Don't you just feel the burning urge to remind people in every gun thread that this could have been a classroom full of children? Don't you think about all the ways that you can massacre innocents in intricate scenarios with all the weapons that the government is too lazy to ban or restrict from you?This is not about petty constitutional hair splitting or arcane statistics or technical functionalities guns. This is about making sure that nobody has the means to make the worst things that you can possibly imagine a person can possibly do into reality.
cameroncrazy1984: Fark It: You said "high capacity" magazines are not vital for self-defense. I did not ask you why cops used firearms, I asked you why they use "high capacity magazines" when they aren't vital for self-defense.Because they use firearms in other applications than self-defense. I don't know how I could've made that any more clear. It's like asking why the Army uses high-capacity magazines when they aren't vital for self-defense.
SurelyShirley: Parthenogenetic: The regime and its media allies want you to think we're the enemy, but we're the thin line of heroes that separates you from tyranny.If the "regime" (which ever it may be) decides that tyranny seems like a good idea, they'll come to you with reapers and hellfire missiles. Before you and your band of heroes can yell "1776 will commence!" your entire block will go boom.
Alonjar: Purdue_Pete: [Days since last shooting.jpg]Since when is a double homicide a "mass shooting"?
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jan 20 2017 02:07:28
Runtime: 0.630 sec (630 ms)