It's like it's a competition to see who can do the most evil, fucked up thing. And now there will be all kinds of shrill debate about gun control and mental illness, and it won't mean a damned thing. This is just where the human race is in 2012, we slaughter children for no reason and there's nothing anyone can do to prevent it. It's fucking depressing.
This is just disgusting.Now the story is coming in,it seems the shooter killed his Mother,and then in spite started shooting kids.His Mother was a teacher at the school.Then the coward realizes what he did,and his true color come out.He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking sickening
>He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking sickening
Indeed.
This is why I hate the death sentencing countries ave. What purpose does it actually do? In fairness some people do so much sickening things like this, they shouldn#t be allowed to roam freely, but then, killing them is an easy way for them and then leaves us with a body to dispose of. Maybe because of the way I was raised, but people like this should live just to suffer and realize what they did. Then they should make it a message to others. The world needs to be evil in a good way, not evil in an evil way...
----
On a quest for Digital 573 and Dancing Stage EuroMix 2
"The gunman's home": He was 20 and "developmentally disabled," so the mother was probably found dead IN HER OWN HOME, which happened to be where he lived.
They were supposedly her guns. It isn't known that he shot her. His first shots at the school killed her boss.
> Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it.
Tell them guns are not the problem and the real problem is all these budget cuts and how the schools are being run.
A nobody off the street should NOT be allowed access to classrooms period.
kids riding school buses home are a thing of the past and big crowds of people line up and grab kids that get out of class. Any one of those people could be nuts and do the exact same thing at anytime.
> Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it.
Well since giving crazies like that guy free access to guns isn't changing things, maybe adding something like mandatory background checks and / or psychological tests could help keep the killings at bay while allowing responsible people to own guns.
Unless of course, the people who don't want gun control to happen are hiding a few things or two... because I see no reason for anyone, conservative or liberal, to not want to keep guns away from crazy people.
> > Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it. > > Well since giving crazies like that guy free access to guns isn't changing things, > maybe adding something like mandatory background checks and / or psychological tests > could help keep the killings at bay while allowing responsible people to own guns.
Well they weren't his guns - they belonged to his mother. Background check wouldn't have helped. The thing is, if you have that lots of guns in the community, it's easier for crazies to get hold of some of them. It's also easier for someone having a bad day to snap and shoot someone rather than just snap and punch them.
> > > Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it. > > > > Well since giving crazies like that guy free access to guns isn't changing things, > > maybe adding something like mandatory background checks and / or psychological > tests > > could help keep the killings at bay while allowing responsible people to own guns. > > Well they weren't his guns - they belonged to his mother.
Crap, just saw that in another reply. Sorry.
> Background check wouldn't > have helped. The thing is, if you have that lots of guns in the community, it's > easier for crazies to get hold of some of them. It's also easier for someone having a > bad day to snap and shoot someone rather than just snap and punch them.
This is also true.
I know it's not as simple as "keep guns away from crazy people", but there really need to be better laws in place.
> > Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it. > > Tell them guns are not the problem and the real problem is all these budget cuts and > how the schools are being run. > > A nobody off the street should NOT be allowed access to classrooms period. > > kids riding school buses home are a thing of the past and big crowds of people line > up and grab kids that get out of class. Any one of those people could be nuts and do > the exact same thing at anytime.
There was a school lock down here not to long ago. The school did just as you described, not letting any of the kids out of the classrooms until the site was secure. I couldn't believe how many parents went ape shit over not being able to walk in and get their kids immediately. Blows my mind how stupid some people can be.
All I know is the that you can make 10 laws because of this...but. it isn't a law abiding citizen that goes into a school to shoot up kids.
> > > > Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it. > > > > > > Well since giving crazies like that guy free access to guns isn't changing > things, > > > maybe adding something like mandatory background checks and / or psychological > > tests > > > could help keep the killings at bay while allowing responsible people to own > guns. > > > > Well they weren't his guns - they belonged to his mother. > > Crap, just saw that in another reply. Sorry. > > > Background check wouldn't > > have helped. The thing is, if you have that lots of guns in the community, it's > > easier for crazies to get hold of some of them. It's also easier for someone having > a > > bad day to snap and shoot someone rather than just snap and punch them. > > This is also true. > > I know it's not as simple as "keep guns away from crazy people", but there really > need to be better laws in place.
Simple, no guns for anyone without a decent reason (self defense shouldn't be a reason).
----
On a quest for Digital 573 and Dancing Stage EuroMix 2
I have no answers for this either. Gun control won't necessarily stop killing, but it would hopefully take guns out of 'people's' hands. Education on mential illness?
I keep thinking of "No County For Old Men". The scene where Tom Jones is visiting with the older fella near the end. He is telling the guy about what horrible stuff is going on. The guy tells him a story of how people have been hurting each other for years and what he is seeing isn't new.
Just wish that there wasn't kids involved in this. I have a neice who is in Kindergarten and I can't get the fact of the horror some families must be going through.
> > He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking sickening > > Indeed. > > This is why I hate the death sentencing countries ave. What purpose does it actually > do? In fairness some people do so much sickening things like this, they shouldn#t be > allowed to roam freely, but then, killing them is an easy way for them and then > leaves us with a body to dispose of. Maybe because of the way I was raised, but > people like this should live just to suffer and realize what they did. Then they > should make it a message to others. The world needs to be evil in a good way, not > evil in an evil way...
In other words, you want revenge.
Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture the killers. How's that for revenge? To defray the costs of justice, sell tickets to the general public. People on school field trips, though, will gain free admission -- after all, this is part of the kids' education, don't do what this guy did or you'll end up just like him.
> > > He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking > sickening > > > > Indeed. > > > > This is why I hate the death sentencing countries ave. What purpose does it > actually > > do? In fairness some people do so much sickening things like this, they shouldn#t > be > > allowed to roam freely, but then, killing them is an easy way for them and then > > leaves us with a body to dispose of. Maybe because of the way I was raised, but > > people like this should live just to suffer and realize what they did. Then they > > should make it a message to others. The world needs to be evil in a good way, not > > evil in an evil way... > > In other words, you want revenge. > > Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture the > killers. How's that for revenge? To defray the costs of justice, sell tickets to the > general public. People on school field trips, though, will gain free admission -- > after all, this is part of the kids' education, don't do what this guy did or you'll > end up just like him.
Or tell them bad people.... eh, don't go to heaven...?
> > > He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking > sickening > > > > Indeed. > > > > This is why I hate the death sentencing countries ave. What purpose does it > actually > > do? In fairness some people do so much sickening things like this, they shouldn#t > be > > allowed to roam freely, but then, killing them is an easy way for them and then > > leaves us with a body to dispose of. Maybe because of the way I was raised, but > > people like this should live just to suffer and realize what they did. Then they > > should make it a message to others. The world needs to be evil in a good way, not > > evil in an evil way... > > In other words, you want revenge. > > Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture the > killers. How's that for revenge? To defray the costs of justice, sell tickets to the > general public. People on school field trips, though, will gain free admission -- > after all, this is part of the kids' education, don't do what this guy did or you'll > end up just like him.
Well, the death penalty is just an easy out for these criminals.
I mean, they'd commit suicide anyway, right? So why are they getting executed when they'd do it to escape punishment? Keep 'em alive as long as possible, that's the real punishment.
>Gun control won't necessarily stop killing, but it > would hopefully take guns out of 'people's' hands.
Only out of the hands of people who obey the law... In other words... The good guys.
In Switzerland, every citizen is issued a fully automatic assault rifle, and they are among the lowest gun crime in the world.
There is not one example in the history of mankind where disarming law abiding citizens has reduced gun crime... The opposite is universally true... Gun crimes go up because criminals know their victims are defenseless.
This notion that gun control will disarm criminals is pure fantasy... They are law breakers by definition... By what fantasy or magic do gun control nuts think that while they will break every other law, THIS law they'll honor?
> Well, the death penalty is just an easy out for these criminals. > > I mean, they'd commit suicide anyway, right? So why are they getting executed when > they'd do it to escape punishment? Keep 'em alive as long as possible, that's the > real punishment.
To die of old age all the while being fed and sheltered at tax-payer expense? Or Perhaps life at hard labor?
> > Well, the death penalty is just an easy out for these criminals. > > > > I mean, they'd commit suicide anyway, right? So why are they getting executed when > > they'd do it to escape punishment? Keep 'em alive as long as possible, that's the > > real punishment. > > To die of old age all the while being fed and sheltered at tax-payer expense? Or > Perhaps life at hard labor?
Simple, they want a better life, they can fucking work for it. They don't wanna work? Give them a damp room with a bad stench with a locked door and cardboard to sleep on.
----
On a quest for Digital 573 and Dancing Stage EuroMix 2
> > > He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking > sickening > > > > Indeed. > > > > This is why I hate the death sentencing countries ave. What purpose does it > actually > > do? In fairness some people do so much sickening things like this, they shouldn#t > be > > allowed to roam freely, but then, killing them is an easy way for them and then > > leaves us with a body to dispose of. Maybe because of the way I was raised, but > > people like this should live just to suffer and realize what they did. Then they > > should make it a message to others. The world needs to be evil in a good way, not > > evil in an evil way... > > In other words, you want revenge. > > Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture the > killers. How's that for revenge? To defray the costs of justice, sell tickets to the > general public. People on school field trips, though, will gain free admission -- > after all, this is part of the kids' education, don't do what this guy did or you'll > end up just like him.
It sounds sick to do but it's the right thing. The only effective way to teach people is t scare them. Scare them they wont do it. It's how I've seen life.
And I think wanting revenge is fair enough, aslong as it's not lethal, why spill more blood.
----
On a quest for Digital 573 and Dancing Stage EuroMix 2
> > Gun control won't necessarily stop killing, but it > > would hopefully take guns out of 'people's' hands. > > Only out of the hands of people who obey the law... In other words... The good guys. > > In Switzerland, every citizen is issued a fully automatic assault rifle, and they are > among the lowest gun crime in the world. > > There is not one example in the history of mankind where disarming law abiding > citizens has reduced gun crime... The opposite is universally true... Gun crimes go > up because criminals know their victims are defenseless. > > This notion that gun control will disarm criminals is pure fantasy... They are law > breakers by definition... By what fantasy or magic do gun control nuts think that > while they will break every other law, THIS law they'll honor?
Switzerland is a special case, though. Everyone there has mandatory military service for a certain amount of time, so they are all trained in how to use guns properly.
"Note to Noobs:
We are glad to help you but simply posting that something does not work is not going to lead to you getting help. The more information you can supply defining your problem, the less likely it will be that you will get smart-alec replies.
> Switzerland is a special case, though. Everyone there has mandatory military service > for a certain amount of time, so they are all trained in how to use guns properly.
Which shows not that Switzerland should be disregarded as an example, but rather that people should have early and frequent exposure and training in that use.
> > Switzerland is a special case, though. Everyone there has mandatory military > service > > for a certain amount of time, so they are all trained in how to use guns properly. > > Which shows not that Switzerland should be disregarded as an example, but rather that > people should have early and frequent exposure and training in that use.
Finland has the same thing too, I have a friend over there who's already served. Apparently he's one hell of a shot
> > In other words, you want revenge. > > > > Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture the > > killers. How's that for revenge? .....
> It sounds sick to do but it's the right thing.
I suppose that by "it", you mean "torture".
> The only effective way to teach people > is t scare them. Scare them they wont do it.
I wonder: how effective? And can you make sure that they are all sufficiently scared? Would there be even, say, one person in 100,000 who would not be effectively scared by this, or who would simply be enraged?
> It's how I've seen life.
Scaring people, or being scared? Or seeing others being scared? Or all three? Wait, I'm not sure I really want to know.
> > And I think wanting revenge is fair enough, aslong as it's not lethal, why spill more > blood.
Yes, why spill it? When there are so many people who need blood donations, spilling blood is just a waste...
I should never have gotten into this discussion. Which is greater: the combined life expectancy of the victims before the shooter did his thing, or the total amount of time people have spent discussing it and thinking about it? It's not like any of this is going to bring the dead people back to life!
I'm going to see if I can terminate my account now... (I am not joking about terminating my account)
> > > In other words, you want revenge. > > > > > > Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture > the > > > killers. How's that for revenge? > ..... > > > It sounds sick to do but it's the right thing. > > I suppose that by "it", you mean "torture".
What's better, justice and suppression of events or creating more corpses and letting them go.
> > The only effective way to teach people > > is t scare them. Scare them they wont do it. > > I wonder: how effective? And can you make sure that they are all sufficiently scared? > Would there be even, say, one person in 100,000 who would not be effectively scared > by this, or who would simply be enraged?
Well maybe, you have to convey WHY they are being treated like such. Yeah sure a kid may feel, but say to the same kid that the man had killed many of said kid's age, surely it would mak them think twice.
> > It's how I've seen life. > > Scaring people, or being scared? Or seeing others being scared? Or all three? Wait, > I'm not sure I really want to know.
The quickest and most effective way to learn if through associating it with a bad thing, such as pain, fear, etc.
> > > > And I think wanting revenge is fair enough, aslong as it's not lethal, why spill > more > > blood. > > Yes, why spill it? When there are so many people who need blood donations, spilling > blood is just a waste...
You're using the wrong term of phrase. Splilling blood as in killing people, not literally spilling blood.
I support help for others and would donate blood myself.
> > I should never have gotten into this discussion. > Which is greater: the combined life expectancy of the victims before the shooter did > his thing, or the total amount of time people have spent discussing it and thinking > about it? It's not like any of this is going to bring the dead people back to life!
No, it's not. Dead means dead. I feel extremely bad for the family, but to discuss is how TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING. God, why do people fight back when clearly it's for a good thing. We're discussing on how to prevent this...
> I'm going to see if I can terminate my account now... > (I am not joking about terminating my account)
> There is not one example in the history of mankind where disarming law abiding > citizens has reduced gun crime... The opposite is universally true... Gun crimes go > up because criminals know their victims are defenseless.
Just ask Mexico.
We'd be much safer if we could shoot back at the army er I mean the drug lords.
Now for the tough questions... If the mother had a develpmentally challenged and/or emotionally unstable son (rather he lived with her or not) why didn't she secure her firearms properly. Yes, that means she bears some responsibility for what happened.
If there is room for new laws, thats were they are needed... Laws to hold gun owners responsible who are careless with their proper storage. ( I know shes dead... But the law would have prompted her to lock them up properly to begin with).
Had she had a proper gun safe, and proper control of access to said safe, they could not have been stolen and used by someone who orherwise would not have had access to guns... Yes, the son tried to legally purchase his own gun the week before... And properly was denied due to a history of mental problems.
Additionally... Consider making it a crime even to try to buy a gun if you are inelligible to actually buy one... Then maybe authorities could have arrested him at the attempt time... At least detain him long enough to determine if he is a danger before releasing him again. This approach would leave legal law abiding citizens alone, but allow immediate examination of an unlawful attempt.
> Now for the tough questions... If the mother had a develpmentally challenged and/or > emotionally unstable son (rather he lived with her or not) why didn't she secure her > firearms properly. Yes, that means she bears some responsibility for what happened. > > If there is room for new laws, thats were they are needed... Laws to hold gun owners > responsible who are careless with their proper storage. > ( I know shes dead... But the law would have prompted her to lock them up properly to > begin with). > > Had she had a proper gun safe, and proper control of access to said safe, they could > not have been stolen and used by someone who orherwise would not have had access to > guns... Yes, the son tried to legally purchase his own gun the week before... And > properly was denied due to a history of mental problems. > > Additionally... Consider making it a crime even to try to buy a gun if you are > inelligible to actually buy one... Then maybe authorities could have arrested him at > the attempt time... At least detain him long enough to determine if he is a danger > before releasing him again. This approach would leave legal law abiding citizens > alone, but allow immediate examination of an unlawful attempt.
We need mental checks, background checks and guns like what were used in Skyfall, I.E, no one can use them except who bought them.
> Now for the tough questions... If the mother had a develpmentally challenged and/or > emotionally unstable son (rather he lived with her or not) why didn't she secure her > firearms properly. Yes, that means she bears some responsibility for what happened.
A gun safe would have done 0 here. He could have just as easily killed her with a brick then got the guns. Or beat the hell out of her until she gave him the guns.
I give you this as something to think about. Some people are not wired right. You can not just lock them all up and throw away the key. As that is a system that is easily abused. But you can not let them roam around either as at any moment you could say or do something to set them off.
Most of the issue is also the media in some ways glorifies them and then makes sure it is not their fault. There is only 1 person to blame for what happened. There are tons of 'shoulda coulda wouldas' here. But only one person did it. Yet everyone is running around trying to figure out what they did wrong. They did nothing wrong. It was the guy who pulled the trigger who did the wrong thing.
> > Now for the tough questions... If the mother had a develpmentally challenged and/or > > emotionally unstable son (rather he lived with her or not) why didn't she secure > her > > firearms properly. Yes, that means she bears some responsibility for what happened. > > I present this http://xkcd.com/538/ > > A gun safe would have done 0 here. He could have just as easily killed her with a > brick then got the guns. Or beat the hell out of her until she gave him the guns. > > http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanz...n=recirculation > > I give you this as something to think about. Some people are not wired right. You can > not just lock them all up and throw away the key. As that is a system that is easily > abused. But you can not let them roam around either as at any moment you could say or > do something to set them off. > > Most of the issue is also the media in some ways glorifies them and then makes sure > it is not their fault. There is only 1 person to blame for what happened. There are > tons of 'shoulda coulda wouldas' here. But only one person did it. Yet everyone is > running around trying to figure out what they did wrong. They did nothing wrong. It > was the guy who pulled the trigger who did the wrong thing.
True. And I feel real bad for that boys mother. If only we knew what caused such things and more importantly, what cured them - permanantly. Now being an aspie myself I don't say that EVERY mentall illness or dysfuntion (or whathave you), but the ones that cause these concflicts, the ones which can end with violence/death.
> > Switzerland is a special case, though. Everyone there has mandatory military > service > > for a certain amount of time, so they are all trained in how to use guns properly. > > Which shows not that Switzerland should be disregarded as an example, but rather that > people should have early and frequent exposure and training in that use.
I disagree, training would have done nothing. everyone knows you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger they are most likely dead. Training isn't going to stop someone bent on killing change their mind... maybe make them more accurate at hitting their targets.
this has nothing to do with gun control, because we can sit and talk about all the laws he broke just entering a school with the guns in the first place, those didn't stop him, or the laws he broke by just opening fire, not even aiming or hitting anyone numerous laws were broke there. then the actual killing themselves so if none of those laws stopped him we are to beleive piling on more laws will ?
I would rather talk about and find a solution too why someone thinks its ok to kill abunch of innocent kids.
the first problem we have as a sosiety is we look for things to blame other than oursleves, we then hype that excuss, we make laws and pass them to stop these "evil" things from forcing us to do such things... only problem is the "things" we pass laws against do absoulty nothing because it all comes down to each and everyone of us making our own decissions not some peice of metal... God forbid we would have to admit as a society that something is very mentally wrong with some of us....
> Now for the tough questions... If the mother had a develpmentally challenged and/or > emotionally unstable son (rather he lived with her or not) why didn't she secure her > firearms properly. Yes, that means she bears some responsibility for what happened. > > If there is room for new laws, thats were they are needed... Laws to hold gun owners > responsible who are careless with their proper storage. > ( I know shes dead... But the law would have prompted her to lock them up properly to > begin with). > > Had she had a proper gun safe, and proper control of access to said safe, they could > not have been stolen and used by someone who orherwise would not have had access to > guns... Yes, the son tried to legally purchase his own gun the week before... And > properly was denied due to a history of mental problems.
I have to disagree. Columbine is a perfect example, the kid their cut the gun safe open at his grampa's house to get to them. point is when someone is that far mentally gone there isn't much that's going to stop them. it didn't stop columbine.
> Additionally... Consider making it a crime even to try to buy a gun if you are > inelligible to actually buy one... Then maybe authorities could have arrested him at > the attempt time... At least detain him long enough to determine if he is a danger > before releasing him again. This approach would leave legal law abiding citizens > alone, but allow immediate examination of an unlawful attempt.
there are many laws against owership of guns. as an ex FFL holder just order a free guns law manual from the ATF and when it gets there just sit and read all the laws, then after numerous hours of reading those, then get those of your state and read those as stated being an ex FFL holder I can state there are many many laws out there just none of them matter to someone bent on killing... If not guns, then knives, improvised explosives, and the simplest killing machine, the automobile. murder was around long before guns, and will be long after we are all gone...
But unlike in the Connecticut case, there was no ban on guns in the area, so he was stopped after only two shots fired by a citizen with a legal concealed handgun.
A second massive killing spree averted.
It happened recently too!
The contrast should have made national headlines...
But there was no mention of the second shooter in the national news, and how he was stopped by a citizen with a legal handgun. No national coverage. All but ignored.
Why? Because an armed citizen saved the day? Because the LACK of a gun ban for law-abiding citizens saved the day? Because it doesn't support the gun control narrative?
In Connecticut area 22 dead, most are children.
In Oregon massive shooting spree averted after only two shots fired thanks to a law-abiding concealed handgun carrying citizen.
The U.S. news is nothing but a political propaganda machine. They don't give a crap about the news.
> Also on last Friday a second shooter was ABOUT to go on a massive rampage in a > shopping mall.... > > But unlike in the Connecticut case, there was no ban on guns in the area, so he was > stopped after only two shots fired by a citizen with a legal concealed handgun. > > A second massive killing spree averted. > > It happend on the exact same day! > > The contrast should have made national headlines... > > But there was no mention of the second shooter in the national news. No national > coverage. All but ignored. > > Why? Because an armed citizen saved the day? Because the LACK of a gun ban for > law-abiding citizens saved the day? Because it doesn't support the gun control > narrative? > > In Connecticut area 22 dead, most are children. > > In Oregon massive shooting spree averted thanks to a law-abiding concealed handgun > carrying citizen. > > The U.S. news is nothing but a political propaganda machine. They don't give a crap > about the news.
1) The mall shooting was last Tuesday and was pretty extensively covered, then became yesterday's news when 20 kindergartners were murdered. 2) The shooter killed 2 people, before killing himself. So there was a killing spree before his suicide, though not a massive one. 3) Does anyone actually have any evidence that the shooter saw Nick Meli hiding behind a pillar with a gun? He said himself he ran from the pillar to a nearby store, it's not like he stood there aiming at the shooter until the shooter committed suicide. Maybe the shooter really *did* kill himself because cops were closing in. Cops were running into the mall less than a minute after the call went over the air. It is possible this guy is just talking himself up because he wants to be a cop himself one day and really had nothing to do with the shooter stopping himself. If we are going to consider the national anti-gun media conspiracy angle, we also need to keep the false hero complex conspiracy angle in mind.
> 3) Does anyone actually have any evidence that the shooter saw Nick Meli hiding behind a pillar with a gun? > He said himself he ran from the pillar to a nearby store, it's not like he stood there aiming at the shooter until > the shooter committed suicide. Maybe the shooter really *did* kill himself because cops were closing in. Cops > were running into the mall less than a minute after the call went over the air. It is possible this guy is just > talking himself up because he wants to be a cop himself one day and really had nothing to do with the shooter > stopping himself. If we are going to consider the national anti-gun media conspiracy angle, we also need to > keep the false hero complex conspiracy angle in mind.
Also, if you look at the public stuff on his facebook profile, he may have a pro-gun agenda that is slanting his narrative towards "armed citizen stops spree killer." Just something to keep in mind.
> > 3) Does anyone actually have any evidence that the shooter saw Nick Meli hiding > behind a pillar with a gun? > > He said himself he ran from the pillar to a nearby store, it's not like he stood > there aiming at the shooter until > > the shooter committed suicide. Maybe the shooter really *did* kill himself because > cops were closing in. Cops > > were running into the mall less than a minute after the call went over the air. It > is possible this guy is just > > talking himself up because he wants to be a cop himself one day and really had > nothing to do with the shooter > > stopping himself. If we are going to consider the national anti-gun media > conspiracy angle, we also need to > > keep the false hero complex conspiracy angle in mind. > > Also, if you look at the public stuff on his facebook profile, he may have a pro-gun > agenda that is slanting his > narrative towards "armed citizen stops spree killer." Just something to keep in mind.
Yeah, this guy sounds like a total mall ninja. I mean, good on him if he avoided taking a risky shot that could have endangered more people, but I highly doubt someone in the middle of a shooting spree took one look at the cold glint in his eye and offed himself out of pure despair.
Also, that shooting absolutely made the national news. Considering the same number of people can get shot on a bad weekend in just about any urban area and it barely makes the regional news, I hardly think it's a vast liberal conspiracy to discredit God-fearing gun owners.
> > > Switzerland is a special case, though. Everyone there has mandatory military > > service > > > for a certain amount of time, so they are all trained in how to use guns > properly. > > > > Which shows not that Switzerland should be disregarded as an example, but rather > that > > people should have early and frequent exposure and training in that use. > > Switzerland is also an example of a place where this sort of shit happens, > unfortunately.
A lot less than here, or anywhere else, including places where guns are banned entirely.
The training isn't for the killers. It's for everyone else, who would, first, being known to have guns, stop more of these people from deciding to do these things, and second, be able to stop them sooner.
> Additionally... Consider making it a crime even to try to buy a gun if you are > inelligible to actually buy one... Then maybe authorities could have arrested him at > the attempt time... At least detain him long enough to determine if he is a danger > before releasing him again. This approach would leave legal law abiding citizens > alone, but allow immediate examination of an unlawful attempt.
Depending on how things happen at the gun store, it is a federal crime. When you pick up a gun, you are in possession of it. If it is illegal for you to possess a gun, they COULD lock you up for at least a few years just on that.
> > > He is a coward,who took his own life instead of facing the music.Fucking > sickening > > > > Indeed. > > > > This is why I hate the death sentencing countries ave. What purpose does it > actually > > do? In fairness some people do so much sickening things like this, they shouldn#t > be > > allowed to roam freely, but then, killing them is an easy way for them and then > > leaves us with a body to dispose of. Maybe because of the way I was raised, but > > people like this should live just to suffer and realize what they did. Then they > > should make it a message to others. The world needs to be evil in a good way, not > > evil in an evil way... > > In other words, you want revenge. > > Here's an idea: public torture. And let it be the victims' families who torture the > killers. How's that for revenge? To defray the costs of justice, sell tickets to the > general public. People on school field trips, though, will gain free admission -- > after all, this is part of the kids' education, don't do what this guy did or you'll > end up just like him.
I'VE BEEN THINKING THE SAME KIND OF THING FOR MONTHS! Not just for murderers, but for rapists as well. Have their victims torture them.
> > Well, the death penalty is just an easy out for these criminals. > > > > I mean, they'd commit suicide anyway, right? So why are they getting executed when > > they'd do it to escape punishment? Keep 'em alive as long as possible, that's the > > real punishment. > > To die of old age all the while being fed and sheltered at tax-payer expense? Or > Perhaps life at hard labor?
The thing is, because of all the necessary appeals and processes, the death penalty itself actually costs more money for taxpayers than a life in prison without parole does. The appeals are absolutely necessary as executing someone who was actually innocent but wrongly convicted is far worse of a crime than not executing an actual criminal. It's insane how much money is spent on the process of carrying out a death penalty.
With regards to gun control, that's pretty much the same avenue of discussion as drug laws. If someone really wants to obtain something, whether it's legal or not, they will do it. Recreational drugs have been illegal/heavily controlled (with regards to prescription medications) for a long time now, but every minute of every day there are people out there using them. If it's something a person wants, they don't care what the consequences are. With guns, it would be the same thing. A sick coward like the ones who commit these horrific acts would still find a way to get a gun and go through with their actions. Banning guns would only make the black market for them that much greater and put money in the hands of the illegal arms dealers. Just like the banning of "controlled substances" simply puts the money into the hands of the cartels and street dealers.
> > > Couple of my liberal friends on Facebook are already asking for it. > > > > Tell them guns are not the problem and the real problem is all these budget cuts > and > > how the schools are being run. > > > > A nobody off the street should NOT be allowed access to classrooms period. > > > > kids riding school buses home are a thing of the past and big crowds of people line > > up and grab kids that get out of class. Any one of those people could be nuts and > do > > the exact same thing at anytime. > > > There was a school lock down here not to long ago. The school did just as you > described, not letting any of the kids out of the classrooms until the site was > secure. I couldn't believe how many parents went ape shit over not being able to walk > in and get their kids immediately. Blows my mind how stupid some people can be. > > > All I know is the that you can make 10 laws because of this...but. it isn't a law > abiding citizen that goes into a school to shoot up kids.
Exactly. Making the gun laws more strict or banning ownership outright won't do anything to stop these crazies. Instead, they'll gut the guns from the black market and proceed as they were going to anyway. Just like the idea that complete bans on controlled substances will stop people from abusing drugs. The only thing it does is give money to the cartels and street dealers. It doesn't stop the user/abuser.
Index 
Threaded 
What the hell is wrong with some people?
Reply
[Re: 
