Today in mass shootings

[Vis]

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

n the days following a violent rampage in southern California in which a lone attacker killed seven individuals, including himself, and seriously injured over a dozen others, citizens living in the only country where this kind of mass killing routinely occurs reportedly concluded Tuesday that there was no way to prevent the massacre from taking place. “This was a terrible tragedy, but sometimes these things just happen and there’s nothing anyone can do to stop them,” said North Carolina resident Samuel Wipper, echoing sentiments expressed by tens of millions of individuals who reside in a nation where over half of the world’s deadliest mass shootings have occurred in the past 50 years and whose citizens are 20 times more likely to die of gun violence than those of other developed nations. “It’s a shame, but what can we do? There really wasn’t anything that was going to keep this guy from snapping and killing a lot of people if that’s what he really wanted.” At press time, residents of the only economically advanced nation in the world where roughly two mass shootings have occurred every month for the past five years were referring to themselves and their situation as “helpless.”

http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131

 

[Vis]

Well duh, what's the law of averages on that.

On October 9, the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) released a revised report showing that 92% of mass public shootings between January 2009 and July 2014 took place in gun-free zones.

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. In a way, this is no surprise. If there's someone present with a gun when a mass shooting begins, the shooter is likely to be shot himself. And, in fact, many mass shootings — from the high school shooting by Luke Woodham in Pearl, Miss., to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo., where an armed volunteer shot the attacker — have been terminated when someone retrieved a gun from a car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter.

Given that gun-free zones seem to be a magnet for mass shooters, maybe we should be working to shrink or eliminate them, rather than expand them. As they say, if it saves just one life, it's worth it.

Oregon is one of seven states with provisions, either from state legislation or court rulings, that allow the carrying of concealed weapons on public postsecondary campuses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The other states are Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Utah and Wisconsin.

UCC was not a gun free zone. Everyone who says it was is lying

 

[Ron Burgundy]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/...un-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds/

This is the only study I could find that shows the reason we have more gun deaths than any other nation. They compare
guns per capita with gun deaths per capita. The evidence shows that the more guns in circulation per capita, the higher
the gun death rate per capita will be. If you want to reduce the rate of gun deaths per capita, then you have to reduce the
number of guns in circulation per capita.

It turns out it is the guns fault. It doesn't matter if its legal or illegal, its the existence of the gun that is the problem.

Yeah but if you remove Chicago, Detroit,Washington D.C., and New Orleans from the equation then we drop to 90th. The VAST majority of gun murders are gang-related and occur in cities long dominated by blacks and Democrats.

 

[Vader]

Yeah but if you remove Chicago, Detroit,Washington D.C., and New Orleans from the equation then we drop to 90th. The VAST majority of gun murders are gang-related and occur in cities long dominated by blacks and Democrats.

Exactly right. They also have very strict gun control. The problem in the U.S. is that some parts of it don't allow people to defend themselves like Detroit, Chicago etc... So they skew the stats when people say "The U.S."

 

[Troglodyte]

It turns out it is the guns fault. It doesn't matter if its legal or illegal, its the existence of the gun that is the problem.

There are rural counties where gun ownership per capita is very high and gun related crimes are none. How do you explain that phenomenon?

 

[ark steel]

There are rural counties where gun ownership per capita is very high and gun related crimes are none. How do you explain that phenomenon?

by ignoring it?

I'd be better if you had a study showing the number of gun deaths caused by illegally obtained guns vs. legally obtained guns.

Actively prosecute the laws we have now and the gun deaths go down., I'd bet.

 

[ark steel]

Also more interesting would be to not focus on gun deaths. Focus on crime, in general, and, maybe violent crime in more detail. If more people are killed by getting beaten to death, does it matter that they were not shot? Probably, not to the dead person. Outside of **** holes like Chicago or DC, maybe NO, how do crime statistics per capita fall in with gun ownership?

I showed some interesting maps where the higher crime (it might have just been murders) areas tended to be pretty well correlated to the counties that voted Democrat in the last presidential election. At least, it was for two states. That was probably the racist Tea Partiers going into Democrat voting strongholds killing off black folks, though.

 

[21STEELERS21]

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000

This is an older chart but rural places like Alaska and Wyoming are near the top in gun deaths.
Illinois and Michigan where Chicago and Detroit are located are in the bottom half of the states.

 

[Vis]

Also more interesting would be to not focus on gun deaths. Focus on crime, in general, and, maybe violent crime in more detail. If more people are killed by getting beaten to death, does it matter that they were not shot? Probably, not to the dead person. Outside of **** holes like Chicago or DC, maybe NO, how do crime statistics per capita fall in with gun ownership?

I showed some interesting maps where the higher crime (it might have just been murders) areas tended to be pretty well correlated to the counties that voted Democrat in the last presidential election. At least, it was for two states. That was probably the racist Tea Partiers going into Democrat voting strongholds killing off black folks, though.

Crime is different than mass killings. Gang violence is also different. Conflating the bad things doesn't help solve any one of them

 

[SteelChip]

Like Rush said; Truth be told, the Libs already have their gun control and it doesn't work. Spout all the inane stats ya want but this is nothing more than a quest to punish the victims. Every one of these school shootings is a gun-free zone. The left has everything they want on these school campuses. No guns! And then when the shooter starts on his rampage, guess what it takes to shut it down? They gotta go find somebody with a gun and bring them in to take out the shooter. This is absurd. If the shooter had known there were guns on site, the odds are this might not have even happened.

This bears repeating. Everything the liberals want, they already have at practically every school in this country. They have a gun-free zone. We had one security guard armed ( with a taser ) that was nowhere near the scene. Outside of that, no guns anywhere except in the hands of the bad guy. Hello, future. And at every one of these shootings this is the case. The good people are disarming themselves. The good people are believing all this hoi polloi that all they've gotta do is get rid of guns and everybody will get rid of guns and bad people will become nice people, and we will be on our way to utopia.

We have given them everything they want, and the evidence is clear it does not work. Gun-free zones do not save lives. They cost lives. And yet we have to listen to Obama. Before we even knew the details, before we even knew how many were dead in Oregon, there's Obama once again calling for disarming good Americans and leaving them without any way to defend themselves against lunatics like this.

AND....The fact that this guy was targeting Christians, you can't find that in the Drive-By Media. No, that's a problem for the media, so they've gotta find other ways to find other news that would seemingly be more important than that. I wonder if it would have made the news if they were all gay, or all black or Heaven forbid they would have been Muslim.

 

[Spike]

Weapons Recovered In Oregon Shooting Purchased Legally

WASHINGTON -- Firearms used on Thursday in a mass shooting at a small community college in Oregon were purchased legally, authorities said on Friday. Some weapons may have been purchased by family members.

Authorities recovered 13 weapons, six from the school and seven from Mercer's residence, said Celinez Nunez, assistant special agent in charge at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives.

She confirmed that all of the weapons were purchased legally and traced to a federal firearms dealer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oregon-shooting-weapons_560ec25be4b0dd85030bd1f9?2md9529

--------------------------

So no laws were broken...well, the only thing to do now is...Achtung! Door to Door Confiscations! - so sayeth the gun grabbers

 

[ark steel]

Crime is different than mass killings. Gang violence is also different. Conflating the bad things doesn't help solve any one of them

Don't give me your bullshit. If places that have higher crime also have fewer guns, especially if violent crime is higher, it matters. Gang violence is more prominent in areas where they don't have to worry about people shooting back. It ain't different, it is violent crime. I'd rather be shot dead than brutally raped and cut up all to hell.

 

[Steelr4evr]

Gun free zones are sitting duck zones. Oh but it's only if you're a gang banger and killing other black gang bangers...just vote democrat .

 

[oneforthebus]

You have a very small, distinct group of people who do things like this, and they seem to share a lot of similarities. I would think the smart thing to do is appoint a commission of psychological and crime experts to study mass shooters, the factors that motivate them, ways to remove incentives to commit mass shootings, ways to reach the socially isolated and help integrate them better into society before they get to this point. Figure out if psychotropic drugs are contributing and find ways to mitigate that. Trying to solve this problem by passing gun laws is like trying to solve alcoholism by regulating alcohol. People who want guns will find ways to get them. We need a comprehensive approach and more power for those who know, live and work with the mentally ill to force them into treatment and/or supervision. We need to fix the motivation, the means will always be there.

Of course our politicians are more interested in using these incidents for their own benefit than they are in solving the problem. If we can blame Republicans and the NRA for this we can get votes. That's all they care about.

 

[hamster]

Crime is different than mass killings. Gang violence is also different. Conflating the bad things doesn't help solve any one of them

And it is no more conflated than under the term "Gun Violence". Death by gun includes suicide. It is not surprising that those that wish to do themselves in will go out, buy a gun. and shoot themselves in the head. But in the media, we call it gun violence. Talk about conflating.

 

[SCSteeler4life]

There are rural counties where gun ownership per capita is very high and gun related crimes are none. How do you explain that phenomenon?

Us old white people don't gang bang.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

The govt is no more going to round up all guns than they are going to round up all illegal immigrants.

 

[Elfiero]

I'm pro gun myself but it's hard to argue against the facts.

UCC is NOT a gun free zone and there were actually ccw holders on campus who were afraid to engage the shooter for fear of being shot by police. A situation I always wondered about since ABC primetime showed how it's almost useless to have armed teachers and students.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...th-gun-was-on-ucc-campus-at-time-of-massacre/


‘Good Guy With A Gun’ Was On
UCC Campus At Time Of Massacre
BY JUDD LEGUM OCT 2, 2015 9:44AM
Umpqua Community College, the site of the massacre on Thursday that left at least 10 people dead, was not — in law or in practice — a gun free zone.
It was the policy of university administrators to limit the use of guns to the extent allowed by law. But, as ThinkProgress and the New York Times reported, Oregon is one of seven states that allows concealed carry on postsecondary campuses. This was based on a 2011 state court decision invalidating efforts to ban guns at public universities in Oregon. Public colleges like UCC are permitted to exclude concealed weapons from certain buildings and facilities but not the campus in general.
But not only was UCC not a gun free zone by law, there were also people who brought guns onto campus at the time of the massacre.
John Parker Jr., a veteran and student at UCC, spoke with MSNBC and revealed that he was in a campus building with a concealed handgun when the shooting started. He suggested other students with him at the time were also carrying concealed handguns.
Advertisement


The issue of whether UCC was a “gun free zone” has become a source of controversy. Gun advocates argue that “gun free zones” encourage gun violence by creating a space where people are unable to defend themselves.
This is not supported by the facts. According to a study of 62 mass shootings over 30 years conducted by Mother Jones, “not a single case includes evidence that the killer chose to target a place because it banned guns.” Many of those mass shootings took place in areas were guns where permitted, but not a single one was stopped by armed civilians.
Parker’s interview revealed the practical difficulties of armed civilians trying to stop a mass shooting. By the time he became aware of the shooting, a SWAT team had already responded. He was concerned that police would view him as a “bad guy” and target him, so he quickly retreated into the classroom.

 

[Tibs]

The point President Obama was making the other night...

 

[Tibs]

 

[Tibs]

 

[SteelChip]

Umpqua Community College is a posted Gun Free Zone but allows concealed carry under Oregon law. The college security page states the following:

“Possession, use, or threatened use of firearms (including but not limited to BB guns, air guns, water pistols, and paint guns) ammunition, explosives, dangerous chemicals, or any other objects as weapons on college property, except as expressly authorized by law or college regulations, is prohibited.

Possession of knives with a blade longer than 4” is prohibited.

Brandishing weapons is prohibited.

Misuse of personal defensive weapons – e.g., pepper spray, etc. is prohibited. The owner is responsible and accountable for any misuse of these devices.”


Arguing with Liberal trolls is definitely an exercise in futility.




My argument ends with the Charles Cooke stance. The Libs scream for gun laws to change but history proves that even after the Sandy Hook tragedy, with all the new laws that were passed because of it, not one of them would have effected that outcome. The Left, led by King Barry, want new gun regulations but we have yet to hear one single idea that would have made a bit of difference in the outcome of these tragedy's.

 

[oneforthebus]

Nice slogans Tibs. Now please tell me what regulations you want that would have prevented any of these shootings.

You do realize, Reagan banned fully automatic weapons..machine guns. They remain banned today. Are you for banning semi-automatic weapons? Or just certain ones that look extra scary.

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

 

[Vader]

Nice slogans Tibs. Now please tell me what regulations you want that would have prevented any of these shootings.

You do realize, Reagan banned fully automatic weapons..machine guns. They remain banned today. Are you for banning semi-automatic weapons? Or just certain ones that look extra scary.

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

Most people don't know the difference between semi-autos, fully- auto and a box of cracker jacks. You won't get an answer from the libs about what they would do because they either don't want to tell you the truth (Ban all guns) or they know nothing can be done that will work so they just want something to ***** about.

Fact is nothing can be done unless the government is willing to do something about mentally ill people. That's the issue. But libs don't want to touch that so they focus on a political issue in guns. They'd rather try to get votes than actually do anything. That's why none of them will tell you what they'd do that would do anything to stop this ****.

 

[Rod Farva]

If no one ever learned his name the fame motivation might go away. I can't square that with freedom of the press yet but still

Damnit! That's twice in the same thread I've agreed with you. Stop it. Just stop it!

I don't have any answers oneforthebus. It's not my role or duty to figure that out. Or are you just admitting that everything that can be done, Constitutionally, has been and anything further may be, well, un Constitutional? But I do know that that current trend of complete inaction by federal and state legislators is incorrect. As are the exaggerated and embelished talking points of the NRA. I say let them implement what Obama calls "modest gun regulations" and see what happens. By all means...who cares about specifics? And since obama is every man I'm secure in allowing him carte blanche with this issue. What is there to lose? Decent, law-abiding gun owners wouldn't be affected at all. This you know how? I mean since we're proposing an amorphous, nondescript slew of new regulations how can anyone say who would or would not be affected?Yes, hardened criminals would probably still be able to get guns, no doubt. Then the point would be?But maybe, just maybe it has an affect and reduces gun deaths and mass shootings overall. For that one reason only, it's worth trying. But no, to the far right that's "communist-facist-socialist-devil-worship" the second any form of gun control is brought up. And I think that's just dumb and backwards and self-defeating as anything currently happening in our society. And I don't understand conservatives, at all, for not wanting to do something positive regarding this issue, to help fix what is clearly a problem. Or at least trying to do something about it. Does the NRA truly have every single Republican in their back pocket? Is that much hard cash being doled out? Has corruption and special interest groups literally taken over the GOP? Regarding this issue, it sure seems that way.

Liked what I heard yesterday......we are called conspiracy theorists if we point out that obama/libs would like to ban guns. But obama himself points to countries that have done exactly that as "models" for us to emulate.