[quote]jjoseph_x wrote:
orion wrote:
If logic dictates otherwise, why do these shootings never happen at gun shows?
Because there are lots of people with guns around.
If you have a gun (and sufficient ammunition) and you’re up against 100 people who don’t, you’re clearly at an advantage.
If you have a gun, and everyone else does too… you’ve only got the advantage of surprise.
Normally when you shoot at people, you don’t want for them to be able to shoot back.
[/quote]
that was my point
[quote]archiewhittaker wrote:
obatiger11 wrote:
archiewhittaker wrote:
obatiger11 wrote:
violent pleasantries
Do you know what impulsive means? Did you understand my post? I didn’t understand yours. What about color-TV??
Yes, I know what impulsive means, but I am not the type of impulsive person who would kill someone. Then read it again.
Why did you bring up Manson like he was the source for the shootings? Manson knew what he was doing, he took drugs and consciously altered his mind-state to be able to kill, the VA kid did probably not. Which one of them deserve the kind of senseless torture you described?[/quote]
Both of them deserve a slow and painful death. Why do you seem so contempt on defend murderers? That is the problem with out legal system now.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
tme wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
All foreigners who enter this country should have to provide documentary evidence of mental stability — letters from local officials showing no criminal record for one.
We are FAR too lenient in who we let into this country. A bunch of Somali Muslims in Minnesota voted a Muslim into our Congress. In 15 or 20 years, this dude will have seniority to sit on powerful committees. Where will his loyalties lie?
Typical hysterical xenophobic bullshit from Headdouchebag. I think we should make the people who teach our kids provide documentary evidence of mental stability as well.
And, to put this into a little perspective: one suicidal maniac killing 32 innocent people is a pretty slow day in Bahgdad. Try to imagine the effect on our national psyche if this happened every day, day after day.
How is wanting to keep maniacs out of our country xenophobic?
It wouldn’t work against all maniacs though, since you’re already here.
[/quote]
He came to the country in 92, that would put him at let’s see, 9 years of age when he came to the country? So you and debbie schuster can take your bullshit elsewhere.
[quote]PGA wrote:
Jack Asshole Thompson blaming it on video games once again…
I love how he is now a “school-shooting expert” when all he has ever done is blame anything and everything on videogames. I guess nobody remembers when he pulled the same stunt for the salt lake shootings, the kid in that one didn’t even own a computer or console.
Damn ambulance chasers.
[quote]JD430 wrote:
I found a pretty good list of school shootings in the past 2 or 3 decades from a Canadian website:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/school-shootings/
Look at how many took place outside the United States…many in recent times were in Canada, with all of her gun control methods.
Its a shame that less enlightened people immediately jump to make political points out of a situation like this.
Everyone has a pet theory why these things happen. Ultimately, everything boils down to human psychology. Rampage killers, especially in the school environment, follow very similar patterns.
If you are interested, Col. Dave Grossman lays out much of the common traits in his books and articles on his website. As a law enforcement officer, I can also tell you that his work is very influential in our business.
Part of our misperception of these incidents is that they are an “American” problem. This lends itself to the “guns caused this” crap because we are one of the last somewhat free peoples on earth, and as such enjoy some of the more liberal gun regulations on the planet.
A good example is the sarin gas attacks in Japan’s subways a few years ago. Japan has some of the most restrictive gun laws in existence. That didnt stop a couple of disturbed, evil people from finding a way to kill a lot of innocents.
9-11 happened with out one bullet being fired or even a single gun being produced. These incidents happen all of the world. Massacres are as common a part of life in the 3rd world as is starvation and disease. We just rarely hear about them because of a lack of media presence. The United States dominates the world media,
and incidents in our country are broadcast loud, clear and often.
The flip side of thinking that taking guns away from the populace would prevent
future massacres is the belief that more armed, decent citizens could prevent violence from spreading as massively as it did yesterday.
The police can’t get there fast enough.
We have started to realize this more and more. While we have adapted our tactics as best we can(more lessons will come out of yesterday’s shooting), we are always behind the bad guy’s thought curve.
If a lone, motivated nut decides to pack a duffel bag with pipe bombs, or guns or poison gas, he is going to do a lot of damage…barring a miracle that has him getting intercepted before he starts. There is no way to completely protect our malls, schools and public spaces from these type of events. If it were possible, I doubt many of you would want to live in such a world, as individuality and freedom would be forgotten concepts.
Guns aren’t the only scapegoats. The finger will be pointed at rap music, video games, mixed martial arts, and violent movies. While there can certainly be vile aspects to some of those examples, the end result of violence is 1000 times more dependent on the receiver’s state of mind and personal history.
All I can say is try to be safe. If you are fortunate to live in a state that allows you to carry a firearm and you can handle the responsibility, please do so.
You may save many lives one day. Stay in shape. Be vigilant. Think about violent incidents like this from time to time and try to resolve yourself to acting if you are ever thrust in the middle of one.
There is nothing more that any of us can do. [/quote]
Good post
[quote]scottiscool wrote:
I’m not sure of the ages and how familiar everyone is with colleges, but being a current student in a pretty large(28,000 undergrad) school I think I should share a little more. When the local transportation system breaks down we are notified pretty fast, within minutes.
I think they could do the same for a shooting. There are ways to get in contact with entire buildings through their information desks and make quick announcements about things. I could probably notify half the campus myself just by looking at numbers on the school website. The president or whoever could have done the same.
If someone felt it was needed they could have called each building on campus and had them pull the fire alarm and give instructions pretty fast. Or at least informed the students and let them make a decision as to whether they felt comfortable sitting in their class knowing one of their peers/friends was just murdered. [/quote]
Thanks for the info scott.
My argument was based on whether it was sensible or logical to do something like call each building and have someone pull the fire alarms to warn students of a murder that happened on campus somewhere - when it wasn’t a sniper situation or some indication the shooter fled into a campus building or whatever.
I felt that would have caused a great deal of alarm. Would such a response have been met with “yeah and?” by many of the students?
If someone pulled the firealarm in my dorm and scared the crap out of me and then told me well they wanted me to be aware someone somewhere on campus had been killed in their dorm, I honestly think I would have been wondering-“what the hell is your point?”
Again, if there was a threat to the campus then fine. But there was NO indication the campus was in any danger and reacting with fire alarms and screaming about a killer on the loose would be absolutely the wrong thing to do. I would guess the campus officials felt the same way. If the shooter had killed two people and then fired additional shots at others or even in the building in the building-I could see it.
But he shot those two and fled.
Why would the administration decide to create a huge chaos and stampede and fear based on that?
That was my point.
Thanks again for the info on modern campuses and the technology to get word out etc. I appreciate it.
[quote]PGA wrote:
david dunne wrote:
What if the murder was 1 block off campus with student victims?
Whats the call then?
Evacuate the town?
Evacuate the campus?
For a couple hours?
For a few days?
Unrealistic.
Again…this happened ON a COLLEGE CAMPUS in a COLLEGE DORM and in a COLLEGE CLASSROOM. This wasn’t on the outskirts of the college involving non-students. This happened to COLLEGE KIDS on a COLLEGE CAMPUS.
People were murdered on campus and the killer was on the loose. Seems perfectly logical to alert people via email that they may not get for hours or days or ever…[/quote]
You keep repeating the COLLEGE part. I think we got that. I just don’t see the difference and I dont see the logic of pulling fire alarms and screaming “a killer” is on the loose.
IF he had been a sniper-then I would agree.
IF he had been seen fleeing into some campus buildings - then I agree.
IF he had fired shots at anyone else or even into the roof or whatever in that first dorm - then ok.
Those would have been indications the guy was not finished. That the guy was willing to widen the situation and kill some more.
But he didn’t dude. Ok-get it yet? He didnt. He shot two particular people and then he fled the scene. Combine that with the cops being told by the dorm residents about the female victim having fights with the boyfriend…it just doesnt add up to equal “LETS PULL FIRE ALARMS AND PANIC 25,000 STUDENTS A KILLER IS ON THE LOOSE”.
There were also reports of students who read the email and still went on about their day and went to class.
Like I addressed earlier - he was determined to come back and kill. It would have simply been a student lounge or a library or the open green area or whatever.
[quote]superscience wrote:
Think about it, if the killer had to go to great lengths to get a gun because guns were protected, he may have had time to calm his emotions and may not have done the crime. [/quote]
Or he might have just chosen a different weapon.
He could have walked down to the local hardware store and bought all the ingredients he needed for a pipe bomb, or made a trip to a home & garden shop and a gas station for everything he needed for an ANFO bomb.
If the guy was determined to commit mass murder, there are plenty of ways to accomplish that goal without using a gun.
[quote]obatiger11 wrote:
archiewhittaker wrote:
but some violent acts are impulsive. What if you come home from work and find your wife in bed with another (man, woman or beast) and kill them both? torture shouldn’t be justified for some crimes and not for others.
Thanks for NOTHING!!! That’s the kind of mentality that lets fuckers like Charles Manson sit on death row whistling Dixie, eating free meals, writing books, and watching free color TV. While those of us are out busting our assess each day working to pay tax dollars to support these shitbags all the while worrying about which future fuckup is going to shoot us in the fucking head for doing nothing but being honest, hard-working citizens.
Anyways if I caught my wife fucking another guy I would first break his back with a baseball bat and then crush every bone in his lower half so every time he took a step (if he ever could again) he would remember the mistake he made. As for her, I’d make her watch and tell her next time she gets the same!!!
[/quote]
next time? so when you get out of jail for attempted (or actual) murder you and her will put it back together?
your wife is banging another guy, what do you do? walk away. get a lawyer. she’s not who you thought she was. she’s a whore. the marriage was a fucking lie. be a big boy and move on. if your lawyer is worth a shit she won’t get a fucking dime.
[quote]Steve4192 wrote:
superscience wrote:
Think about it, if the killer had to go to great lengths to get a gun because guns were protected, he may have had time to calm his emotions and may not have done the crime.
Or he might have just chosen a different weapon.
He could have walked down to the local hardware store and bought all the ingredients he needed for a pipe bomb, or made a trip to a home & garden shop and a gas station for everything he needed for an ANFO bomb.
If the guy was determined to commit mass murder, there are plenty of ways to accomplish that goal without using a gun. [/quote]
You’re right! Thank goodness it’s so easy to get guns, otherwise there would be bombings every damn day!
Seriously though, I think it’s a cultural thing. Handguns are scary, IMO, because their intended purpose is to kill people.
Nothing freaks me out quite like a poorly trained renta-cop or a hero wannabe with a gun. To a lot of Americans that I’ve met however, a gun is a symbol of freedom and protection. They feel safer because of all those guys with guns. I don’t get it, but I also don’t get why someone would want to go on a killing spree, so clearly I don’t have all the answers…
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
orion wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
AdamC wrote:
steadfastred wrote:
Its a shame that students and faculty are barred from pleading the 2nd on colleges in Virginia. The death toll could have been much lower, still a tragedy; we know now how many can die when people are prevented self defense:
32 innocent lives…
…And one room temperature wack-job who killed himself at the end.
Maybe I don’t get it because i’m British, but that point of view seems wacky to me.
Isn’t the fact that guns are so poorly controlled the reason some wacko can walk in to a school and fire a weapon and kill so many poor people?
Rather than arming everyone to the teeth shouldn’t you be trying to stop people getting hold of weapons so easily. Maybe it’s too late for that, i don’t know.
All i know is, I wouldn’t know where to get a gun and I have absolutely no fear of anyone pulling a gun on me.
I’m not for strict gun regulation, but there’s no evidence that being armed for ‘self-defense’ saves any lives [except perhaps in an indiivual burglary situation and even there the evidence is questionable]. And logic dictates otherwise. When was the last time crossfire saved any lives?
If logic dictates otherwise, why do these shootings never happen at gun shows?
Because lunatic, anti-social misfit teenagers typically don’t attend gunshows. They do attend high school and college can easily kill 20 people before the small percentage of those who would actually carry guns–amidst the vast majority who don’t–would attempt to respond and contain the lunatic, killing more people in the process.[/quote]
wait. what the fuck are you saying? the kids have to get the guns someplace rgiht? aren’t gun shows the preferred place for the media and liberal fuckos like you to tell us they get them?
okay. so they get them at sporting goods stores. get a background check. wait a month. whatever. sure. it’s all perfectly above-board. THEN when he starts KILLING people and some citizens try to shoot the killer…they’d end up shooting 31 innocent people before they got this guy? brilling, dickhead.
[quote]david dunne wrote:
Would such a response have been met with “yeah and?” by many of the students?
If someone pulled the firealarm in my dorm and scared the crap out of me and then told me well they wanted me to be aware someone somewhere on campus had been killed in their dorm, I honestly think I would have been wondering-“what the hell is your point?”
[/quote]
Yeah, I agree. I don’t even leave my dorm room when the fire alarm goes off because I assume it’s some idiot burning popcorn… like the 30 other times this year.
I live on a campus of only about 1,500, and I don’t think I would lock myself down in my dorm or evacuate (whatever that means, where the fuck would I go, into downtown Hoboken/Jersey City and have a better chance of being shot?) if police told me some dude shot his girlfriend.
And as far as the dude fleeing the scene… isn’t that what most murderers do?
This is a terrible tragedy, but it’s not the fault of the police or the politicians, as much as they might fuck other shit up. Maybe if his family and friends had given him the support to get through (what I imagine was) a tough time in his life or to get him help to overcome the psychological disorder he probably had, this situation would’ve been avoided.
Hell, maybe if just a random stranger or two had been nicer to him, maybe he would’ve never been tipped over the edge. Think about that the next time you mistreat somebody you don’t know for no real reason.
[quote]lurker26 wrote:
A bunch of Somali Muslims in Minnesota voted a Muslim into our Congress. In 15 or 20 years, this dude will have seniority to sit on powerful committees. Where will his loyalties lie?
I know!! Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of evangelical Christians voted some Born Again former coke-head into the White House!! That would probably be a disaster… where would his loyalties lie!![/quote]
disaster? you’ve DECIDED it’s a disaster because the NY times, CNN, CBS, al gore, bill clinton, jimmy carter and a host of terrorists who want to kill us have TOLD your dumb fucking ass it’s a disaster. What I see is this:
no attacks on american civilians by muslim terrorists since 9/11/2001, more than five years.
despite the largest attack in history on US soil the economy is strong and unemployment is down (SMALL story but i’m sure you’ve been following it). thanks to those dreaded ‘BUSH tax cuts for the rich’.
lucky the democrats want those things repealed so we can rev up the welfare state and pander to the morons who vote democrat by giving them free goodies…on the backs of those of us who fucking WORK for a living.
a cleaner enviroment than at any time in our nation’s history (MUCH smaller story but i bet you’ve never been able to find it reported in your favored media outlets).
lastly, fuck you.
[quote]iscariot wrote:
meat1wad wrote:
This is no ones fault except the man who did the shooting.
Its not because guns are easy to get.
Sure, it’s not the gun’s fault insofar as a gun is an inanimate object - but if the availability of weapons is such that someone precipitating such an action can easily access a weapon then something needs to be investigated.
However, that is around process, nothing more.
I had to laugh at the person who said that it wouldn’t have happened if all the students staff etc were legally carrying…
No, what would have happened, if the person was seriously about going out in a blaze of glory/ suicidal etc would have been a firefight with people with no real training in firearms control being involved and heaps of collateral damage to bystanders from al;l the extra bullets flying around.
Can someone tell me if there is a requirement for someone purchasing a firearm to go through a firearms safety and usage course??
The man who did this was obviously insane. I am no expert but I dont think he was living a normal life, then just woke up one morning and decided he was gonna go kill 32 people.
Anyone who does this sort of thing has some type of severe mental and/or physical disorder.
Examples are everywhere. Look at famous serial killers. Berkowitz, Bundy, Dahmer, they were all insane. Even that guy who shot all those people from a clocktower(?) in Texas.
Errr no. These peopel had various forms of personality disorder, but were not insane - that would be why they ended up in prison and not in an asylym (They did try to play the insane card though).
Go to www.crimelibrary.com and read their serial killers section; you’ll see how few serial killers are genuinely insane.
[/quote]
Anywhere in the world, if a person wants a gun they can get one. That wont change.
And about the serial killers, even though they werent clinically insane, I ment that as a general term for all of them. There all fuckin nuts. They are not normal.
[quote]lurker26 wrote:
A bunch of Somali Muslims in Minnesota voted a Muslim into our Congress. In 15 or 20 years, this dude will have seniority to sit on powerful committees. Where will his loyalties lie?
I know!! Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of evangelical Christians voted some Born Again former coke-head into the White House!! That would probably be a disaster… where would his loyalties lie!![/quote]
What if a bill comes to his committee funding a strike against a terrorist country or organisation, said group being Muslims?
[quote]DS 007 wrote:
lurker26 wrote:
A bunch of Somali Muslims in Minnesota voted a Muslim into our Congress. In 15 or 20 years, this dude will have seniority to sit on powerful committees. Where will his loyalties lie?
I know!! Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of evangelical Christians voted some Born Again former coke-head into the White House!! That would probably be a disaster… where would his loyalties lie!!
disaster? you’ve DECIDED it’s a disaster because the NY times, CNN, CBS, al gore, bill clinton, jimmy carter and a host of terrorists who want to kill us have TOLD your dumb fucking ass it’s a disaster. What I see is this:
no attacks on american civilians by muslim terrorists since 9/11/2001, more than five years.
despite the largest attack in history on US soil the economy is strong and unemployment is down (SMALL story but i’m sure you’ve been following it). thanks to those dreaded ‘BUSH tax cuts for the rich’.
lucky the democrats want those things repealed so we can rev up the welfare state and pander to the morons who vote democrat by giving them free goodies…on the backs of those of us who fucking WORK for a living.
a cleaner enviroment than at any time in our nation’s history (MUCH smaller story but i bet you’ve never been able to find it reported in your favored media outlets).
lastly, fuck you.
[/quote]
You, sir, are hilarious. However, my point was that in a democratic system, all political figures are beholden (to some extent) to the people who voted them into office. I think it’s obvious that if a lot of Muslim voters put someone into office, he would have some loyalty towards them, and he SHOULD.
I was trying to address the underlying racism of the comment I quoted by reversing the viewpoint a little. Glad to see I didn’t touch any nerves there.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
tme wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
All foreigners who enter this country should have to provide documentary evidence of mental stability — letters from local officials showing no criminal record for one.
We are FAR too lenient in who we let into this country. A bunch of Somali Muslims in Minnesota voted a Muslim into our Congress. In 15 or 20 years, this dude will have seniority to sit on powerful committees. Where will his loyalties lie?
Typical hysterical xenophobic bullshit from Headdouchebag. I think we should make the people who teach our kids provide documentary evidence of mental stability as well.
And, to put this into a little perspective: one suicidal maniac killing 32 innocent people is a pretty slow day in Bahgdad. Try to imagine the effect on our national psyche if this happened every day, day after day.
How is wanting to keep maniacs out of our country xenophobic?
It wouldn’t work against all maniacs though, since you’re already here.
[/quote]
For one thing, unless you have a clear mental disorder a psych eval won’t reveal anything.
Anyone could snap after the fact and criminal inclinations aren’t mental disorders (they know exactly what they’re doing).
That’s just a knee-jerk reaction to the situation (one crazy Korean committed the crime, so let’s screen all immigrants more closely).
I agree though, that they should screen more diligently for criminal records when possible (if you’re a refugee from Sierra Leon, they don’t exactly keep criminal record information).
But then again if a criminal wants to get into the country illegally, they could find a way (just get into Mexico and make your way in from there).
But the issue isn’t race or immigration.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
lurker26 wrote:
A bunch of Somali Muslims in Minnesota voted a Muslim into our Congress. In 15 or 20 years, this dude will have seniority to sit on powerful committees. Where will his loyalties lie?
I know!! Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of evangelical Christians voted some Born Again former coke-head into the White House!! That would probably be a disaster… where would his loyalties lie!!
What if a bill comes to his committee funding a strike against a terrorist country or organisation, said group being Muslims?
[/quote]
Probably the same thing he’d do when a white Senator signs off on a funding a strike against… oh wait, we only bomb brown people nowadays.
If somebody is voted into political office, it means that enough people believe that person represents their best interests. There’s lots of brown people in this country and not all of them worship Hay-zeus. Get over it.
I just finished reading a play that was written by the shooter:
I can now understand why he was labeled as a troubled person.
jet
Personally, I think I have a right to own and use anti-aircraft artillery. Just think, if those people in the World Trade Center had been allowed to carry anti-aircraft artillery, the 9-11 tragedy would have never happened.
When they outlaw anti-aircraft artillery, only outlaws will have anti-aircraft artillery!
By the way, I feel the same way about hand grenades.