Four killed at Chicago-area shopping center

[lebkuchen]

Source: AP

Five people were shot Saturday at a women's clothing store south of Chicago, authorities said.

Tinley Park police reported four deaths in the shooting at a Lane Bryant store in a strip mall, Will County Coroner Patrick O'Neil told the Chicago Tribune.



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22966597/

---

"Life" in America

[Name removed]

1. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

2. Terrible loss...

My thoughts are with the victims families.

[smoogatz]

3. Because guns don't kill people—

lunatics with guns kill people.

[pipoman]

5. I would only add...

lunatics with guns kill people in gun free zones.

[depakid]

70. Funny- I'm in a gun free zone- and never have to worry about being shot at

Sadly, Americans will never get to experience that freedom....

[Tejas]

97. Let me guess

you work at the Pentagon?

[bossy22]

134. actually

there are shooting all the time in AU, not to the degree we have here, but your gun free zone is far from a gun free zone

[michreject]

35. And gun free zones

deny people the right to defend oneself.

[smoogatz]

38. So you're saying, had it not been a gun-free zone, those ladies

would have been armed? Wow.

[michreject]

54. It would have been their choice

And I guarantee that at the last moment of their life, they wished they had a gun.

[smoogatz]

60. Maybe they wished the deranged shooter didn't have a gun.

Maybe they wished we didn't lose over 7,000 people a year in this country to gun homicides, and that guns weren't so appallingly easy to obtain.

[Pavulon]

63. There is a BAN in Chicago

Like guns are banned. So this person obtained it illegally. Like people obtain illegal drugs.

The problem is bigger. When do people here use weapons when their swiss counter parts do not?

[northzax]

220. the Swiss?

you mean the people with mandatory conscription, a fully homogenous, wealthy society with a strong social welfare net? those Swiss?

if the price of owning a firearm was two years of mandatory military service, followed by a biannual refresher course to the age of 45, I say go for it.

[bossy22]

64. they arent that easy

to obtain unless you have a clear background history.

[smoogatz]

94. Or buy them at a gun show. Or used, from an individual. Or stolen.

Or steal them yourself, from some goofball who thinks he's protecting his wide-screen TV.

[michreject]

66. They couldn't control what someone else has

Just as you can't control what I have. They were responsible for their own safety and they failed.

[smoogatz]

95. "They were responsible for their own safety and failed"?

That's one fucked-up worldview there, dude. The truth is, we've got more guns, less regulation and more gun violence per capita than any other first-world nation. Fewer guns and more gun regulation=less gun homicide.

[Tejas]

98. Yep, SCOTUS says so. n/t

[michreject]

107. Sarah Brady would be proud of you...nt

[smoogatz]

114. Thanks.

Fine woman, Sarah Brady.

[blondeatlast]

163. She probably would, since I, an unarmed woman, faced an armed robber

and lived to tell about it and send the asshole to the Arizona State Prison.

I expect she'd be very, very proud of me--I know I'm proud of myself...

[bossy22]

194. you were lucky

some people arent as lucky as you are, read my post below i have a little story about a situation much like yours but with a different ending

[bossy22]

195. also

the problem with sarah brady's belief is, is it isnt mine. She believes you will be safer if you just give them what you want. Well in my mind its a choice. I believe you should have the choice to either give in, or fight back. She wants to make it so that i dont have a choice because she believes i will be safer. Well im an adult and i will make decisions about my safety on my own without any of her help

[michreject]

206. OK

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[bossy22]

137. so all that matters

is gun homicide? so if all those people committing murders with guns used fists and knives, America would still be safer?

[michreject]

207. Think what you must

Good thing their wasn't any killing before guns were invented.

[Paladin]

109. Well, There You Have It

Most gun rights extremists have gained just enough polish to avoid statements like "They were responsible for their own safety and they failed." But every once in a while they slip up and it comes out. We all owe a debt of gratitude to michreject.

Because that's exactly how these people feel: there's a huge number of guns, easily procurable in this country. And if you don't avail yourself of the chance to arm up, and something unfortunate happens to you, well tough shit, you got just what you deserved. I've seen this sick philosophy applied to Kitty Genovese, down in the Gun Dungeon. Google her name if you're not familiar with her case, and then marvel that there are alleged human beings on this site that would claim that she was primarily responsible for her own tragic death because she wasn't carrying a pistol that night.

Hey, michreject: How about contacting the families of the people slain at that Lane Bryant store and telling them that their loved ones died because they were responsible for their own safety and failed? Ought to perk them right up.....

[zanne]

123. I think this might help gun people understand...

[Paladin]

150. What A Great And Profound Editorial Cartoon

And what a pity its valuable message won't be grasped by the gun rights crowd....

[zanne]

167. I know. They don't even think about it.

They just react in knee-jerk fashion. The gun control debate on DU has been reduced to "NYAH, NYAH".

[Pavulon]

169. Every time more than 3 people get shot and an LBN

thread pops it becomes a gun control free for all. Each "side" has its morons.

However the reality is pretty simple. Banning stuff never works. See Prohibition and drug laws.

Effective gun control is possible. The NFA of 1934 and 1967 laws are effective and ENFORCED.

This is a social and cultural problem in the US. It needs to be addressed as such.

[slackmaster]

164. Stereotyping people is always a good way to demonize them when you don't have any rational argument

[NickB79]

178. Funny cartoon, reminds me of my dad

He looked like the figure on the bottom, except he had a fist instead of a pointed finger, and he was swinging it at my sister.

I, on the other hand, had a gun, like the first figure......

[blondeatlast]

161. So, by that logic, I've failed because I've been in the presence of an armed man,

did not have a gun nor police protection, and survived?

He wanted money and I gave it to him. I'd so much prefer to have that money than my life. :eyes:

Yes, he was caught and yes, I had to testify. He's serving hard time. I'm such a failure...

[bossy22]

190. i dont get the point

of what you are saying. I'm happy that the crook didnt hurt you, but let me tell you a little story. Back in the early 1980's my father worked in brooklyn, NY. He was walking to his car one evening after work when a man pulled a knife on him and told him to give him his keys and wallet. My father like any sane person handed over the items. Then as my father put it "the bastard still stabbed me" Luckily a bystander saw the whole thing and called the police and my father was alright after surgery but it goes to show you that giving them what you want isnt always a safe bet. For me, id rather not put my trust into a criminals "good heart". But to each his own, and im glad you didnt get hurt

[michreject]

205. There's a lot of people shot

after giving up the money. Your argument makes absolutely no sense.

[Edweird]

68. Behold the fruits of "gun control"; armed criminal, unarmed law abiding citizens

How's that working out for you?

[depakid]

72. "How's that working out for you?"

Working abosultely fine in New South Wales and the rest of Australia.

Haven't had a mass shooting since 1996, when after one such incident, the citizens and the government had finally had enough and implemented a firearm buyback and strict regulations.

Then again, people here were never pathologically obsessed with guns- they don't live in fear, and don't feel the need for a harsh and retributive criminal "justice" system. Kinda goes with the territory, I guess.

[Edweird]

73. And when and where I grew up, EVERBODY had guns. No mass shootings that I recall either.

So?
BTW, we're talking about America, not NSW.

[depakid]

75. "BTW, we're talking about America, not NSW."

Well, that's bloody obvious, since no other western nation has (and will continue to have) these indidents every couple of months.

Yet another sparkling example of exceptionalism.

[Edweird]

76. "exceptionalism". I see. So Au and Us are identical. No differences? None?

Exact same culture. Same history. Same diet. Same flora and fauna.
Whatever. :eyes:

[depakid]

79. Oddly enough, there's a similar history with respect to the frontier

pioneers, bushrangers (outlaws) drovers, cattle stations, hunting and treament of the native populations- to name but a few correlates.

Yet curiously enough, Australians never developed the same sort of "entitlement" mentality that became so obsessive in America- to the point of people wanting or "needing" everything from high capacity semi-automatic pistols to assault rifles.

So when it became obvious that there was a problem- the country dealt with it (successfully). No hue and cry to reinstate the death penalty -public policy simply went for the source.

It's part of a "can do" attitude that flows through a lot of policy choices around here, something that, sadly, most parts of America seem to have lost over the past 20+ years.

[Edweird]

82. America and Australia are two very different countries.

"Yet curiously enough, Australians never developed the same sort of "entitlement" mentality that became so obsessive in America- to the point of people wanting or "needing" everything from high capacity semi-automatic pistols to assault rifles."

That "entitlement" is called the Constitution. It's not something new.

What works for your country won't necessarily work for ours, no matter how much specious reasoning you spout.
For an example, see Iraq.

If the fact that our countries are so different is incomprehensible to you, I don't know what else to say.

[depakid]

88. Having lived in both

I appreciate the histories and similarities- and the differences, much better than most folks.

With respect to guns: one country got got fed up- and chose a path that's led to fewer murders, suicides and gun acccidents.

The other remains in denial, wedded to a dysfunctional set of attitudes beliefs and values about that's doomed it to an appalling homicide rate, repeated mass shootings; killing and injuring themselves and others needlessly. Or, as I've heard it put: "dying with their "rights" on.

Not to mention of course, the world's largest prison system, with more people (both per capita and in raw numbers) incarcerated than any other country in the world.

And all one needs to do is read threads like this one (every couple months- or even weeks) to see that, far from ever getting better, it's only likely to get even worse.

[Edweird]

96. So......

Yes, our prison system is bloated. Is that just a random fact you threw in for the heck of it, or do you feel it is relevant to the gun debate? We have "for profit" prisons. I find that disgusting. We have the bizarre and hypocritical "war on drugs". Both of these help fill prisons. I think it's fucked up. Moving on....

You finally touch on some of our differences. Our cultures ARE different. We Americans LIKE guns. You can sit there and wonder "why won't those Americans just give up their guns?" maybe even a little like w might wonder "why won't those Iraqis be all democratic?"
Because. What works for one culture doesn't automatically translate to another.

And, yes, surely it will get worse before it gets better.
I'm not happy about that.

[boilinmad]

138. Dont speak for all Americans...

....Im one, and I HATE guns.

[karlrschneider]

148. How do you feel about abortions?

:eyes:

[Paladin]

162. I Think That Whenever Someone Uses A Fetus.....

....to kill five people at a shopping mall, your comparison may be valid.....

[bossy22]

168. some people

dont feel that way and the fact is, many many of them are out there

[Name removed]

175. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Edweird]

177. 60 million people. 200 million firearms. est. That looks pretty clear to me.

I can't and won't speak for all Americans. Here, the numbers speak for themselves.

[LanternWaste]

173. Well... they don't appear to have mass shootings--

Well... they don't appear to have mass shootings-- so that seems to be one factor they have over us...

[Tejas]

99. um, yeah......no such thing as murder in NSW (here's your sign)

[depakid]

212. Compare the murder rate of all of Australia with Texas

A state where citizens are both obsessed with firearms and with a draconian criminal "justice" system.

Australia — Population: 20,434,176 (July 2007 est.)

Murder rate: 1.4 victims per 100,000 population.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4510.0Main%20Features22006?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=4510.0&issue=2006&num=&view=

Texas- Population: 23,507,783 (July 2006)

Murder rate: 5.9 victims per 100,000 population.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=169

(Texas is in the midrange of the pack, slightly higher than the national average. Have a look at some of the top states).

[Tejas]

215. Your point is moot - NSW has murders, mass & otherwise n/t

[depakid]

218. Denial is often an effective coping mechanism

Seems to me that if other countries can figure out better ways (on a whole lot of things) Americans can too.

[Tejas]

222. If denying murders occur in NSW helps you cope, more power to you. n/t

[bossy22]

86. just want to remind you

that one of the worst school shootings in US history was done with an ordinary hunting rifle...don't be that complacent down under, just because you havent had one doesnt mean that one isnt going to happen. also i might add in this case it was a robbery so this guy probably did not get his gun legally which means gun controls would have very little effect on him

[LeftyMom]

81. Do you think there's a pent up demand to carry guns at plus size clothing stores?

Fuck, you gun nuts are weird. And people need to remember to lock the damn door on the gungeon, or the rest of the forum starts looking as crazy as the gungeon/the911ungeon/GD:P/IP/batshitcrazysubforumX.

[Edweird]

83. I can't speak for the plus sized womens contingent. I'm a male.

Fuck you idiots are stupid.

[bitchkitty]

117. No, they're not.

You, on the other hand, are being stupid in a very deliberate way. I pity you...

[Edweird]

180. I wasn't talking to you.

Save your pity for yourself. I don't need it.

[bitchkitty]

209. I was talking to you.

And since this is a public message board, yes, you were talking to me, and everyone who read your post.

[bossy22]

84. afraid to see the other side of the coin are we

this was most likely a robbery meaning the gun used in this incident probably changed hands about 12 times before it found its way into this individual. Which means gun control would probably have done didily squat

[LeftyMom]

87. most likely... probably...? Sounds like until there are details nobody knows shit.

So stop trying to score political points on a tragedy until you at least know what's going on.

Vultures. :eyes:

[bossy22]

127. hey i didnt start this debate

im merely pointing out the fact that it was a robbery

[smoogatz]

92. If we had real gun control, we wouldn't have 200 million guns

in private hands in this country. It's really, really easy for crazy people to get guns in the U.S. How's that working out for YOU?

[Pavulon]

102. How many calls to get a hooker, with an 8ball,and a bit of dope

at your door. Not to many. Banning shit never works. See Prohibition. There are serious issues at work that are responsible for people using guns for a quick solution.

This is a robbery murder, no more, no less.

[smoogatz]

103. Bullshit.

It works in every other industrialized country, none of which have anything like the rate of gun homicide we have here.

[Pavulon]

104. I love switzerland

have been on pleasure and on business. Lucerne is cool. Never worried about some asshole holding me at gunpoint driving from ATM to ATM until my card runs out. Heading to Rio next month, not quite the same level of confidence.

BTW there many homes have real machine guns in switzerland. Not the scary fake black toys that cost us the congress in the 90's but real machine guns.

I wonder why they don't shoot each other all the time???

[smoogatz]

110. You're either ignorant or dishonest.

Switzerland has universal compulsory military service. Every male is in the reserves basically for life. Part of that reserve duty is being ready to rush to the defense of the country at (extremely) short notice, so many reservists are required to keep military weapons in their homes. Pretty much everybody has a gun, but everybody is well trained in its use, and all firearms are registered and closely monitored by the government. It's a lot like what the American founders had in mind when they talked about a "well-regulated militia," and a far fucking cry from the current absurd state of affairs in the U.S.

[bossy22]

152. its already spelled out what well-regulated means

in the militia act of 1903

[Pavulon]

156. When I served in the NC NG

weapons were stored in an armory on base. Your weapon was issued when required. Otherwise it was secured. If an active duty soldier or marine lives on base your PERSONAL firearms would be secured at the armory.

The difference is that in switzerland every guardsman (approx 400,000) do not return their weapon to the armory when off duty.

They keep it at home, available.

IE there are 20% of homes with fully automatic weapons issued by the government. They can buy ammo at any firing range. They can practice with that weapon.

They somehow manage not to kill each other.

The moronic concept that access to weapons is a direct correlation to their use is easily dismissed with a quick glance west.

[bossy22]

159. the sad fact is

also that recently there has been some shootings with their service rifles- which puzzles me to why now its starting. why did they not have this 10 years ago when the guns were exactly the same. More and more it makes me believe it is not the gun but some social problem. There needs to be a well funded, independent, comprehensive study into these types of random mass shootings. (and btw, this incident that the OP was talking about is NOT a random mass shooting but a robbery) Why in 1987 did the UK experience its first mass shooting, while the gun that was used had been around for almost 30 years. These are my questions

[smoogatz]

183. Because they're properly trained and their guns are closely tracked

by the government, obviously. Unlike the mess we have here, in which any idiot off the street can purchase as much semi-auto firepower as he can afford, with no training and no registration required. Do you not see the difference? Also, it's worth noting that there's now a movement in Switzerland to store military weapons in barracks instead of homes, because of their relatively high rate of suicide and domestic homicide.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aMKldtonnQMU&refer=germany

[bossy22]

185. couple of things

first of all i never understand why people use suicide as a reason for gun control. Suicide is a mindset, and can be done easily with many other methods such as closing your boiler vent or turning the heat on in your car while you lie back in it (btw both are supposedly painless deaths- you just fall asleep. Secondly i fully support training, i believe there should be a class in highschool that teaches firearm safety, i think its a good idea. Id also like training on defensive firearm skills, but thats a different story. Registration- now im not that strongly against registration but i find that its pointless. for someone who has dealth with ATF traces of registered handguns in NY most of the time all registration does is that they trace it back and find the guy who bought it- and then found it got stolen and the case goes dead. Registration would cost billions of dollars with questionable resultes (as in Canada right now). Not to mention the prospect of only 2/3 of all guns being registered- thats already 100 million unregistered guns. Also i worry about abuse of the system- such as unreasonable fair hikes- like $50 dollars per gun per year. if you want to go into licensing- i find licensing turns into a "give me a reason you should own a gun" which i believe is an infringment on my rights. then it usually ends up being that self defense doesnt constitute a good reason (because a gun is not a good tool for self defense- but we still issue them to cops as defensive weapons). Alright im sorry im going off topic. I have a question, what kind of controls would you like to see?

[smoogatz]

186. See my post below.

I'm into reducing proliferation, and treating gun owners with roughly the same regulatory seriousness with which we treat car owners/operators.

[bossy22]

191. ahh but we do already

lets look at it truthfully. To own a car, you do not need a license, or register it- you simply buy it and its yours. But to drive it on public roads, you need to register it, insure it, and be licensed.

to own a gun, you go in and get a background check, and hand over the money. then gun is now yours. To carry your gun, it needs to be registered, you need to be licensed and have gone through some training scheme that is authorized by your local law enforcement department.

see they are very similar

[Pavulon]

193. Seems there is a movement for everything..

However Geneva is one of the safest cities in the world.

Even with training sending issue weapons home in the US would be a problem. There are cultural differences that make US very different.

The UK murder rate is higher than the swiss, 20% of homes in the UK do NOT have machine guns..

[pipoman]

105. Nor did they when they had equal availability of guns as the US

These countries you speak of UK, Canada, Australia, etc have not always had bans on firearms. Their homicide rates have always been as proportionately lower as it is today. UK homicide rates have remained flat since the 60's or before. There was no great decline after their ban went into effect, same with Canada. Further even though the numbers of privately owned firearms in the US increases every year gun homicide rates have consistently dropped for the last decade according to the FBI crime stats, how could that be if higher gun numbers necessarily lead to more gun violence? Answer, they don't. Your assertion is incorrect.

[smoogatz]

112. In Iraq and Afghanistan, everybody has guns. It's like an NRA wet dream.

You can buy fully automatic weapons anywhere, dirt cheap. Wonderfully safe places, Iraq and Afghanistan.

[pipoman]

119. Just as I suspected

and so typical..when faced with inconvenient reality we tend to look for ways to change the subject...human nature hates to be wrong in long held erroneous beliefs. No comment on the post you are responding to?

[smoogatz]

124. Links please.

Show me where Britain and Canada had a gun for every adult, then instituted strict gun control with no reduction in gun homicide.

On edit: what's typical is disingenuousness of your apples-to-aardvarks "statistics."

[pipoman]

126. Nobody said anything

about "gun homicide" I believe all homicide is equally important. The point of my post is that homicide rates are flat in those countries, who gives a shit if a homicide is occurring with a knife, a club, a rock or a gun? The point is that the rate has been flat, the tools have changed, the causes and quantity have not. If you insist I will post links to crime stats in the UK before and after their gun bans after we determine the question we are answering. One of my biggest peeves ar those who are only concerned with 'gun violence' and have no concern for violence in general or its causes.

[smoogatz]

129. LOL.

This whole thread is about gun homicide, you goofball. And the number of gun homicides annually in this country is more than double the number by all other means combined. Show me where that's the case in any other developed country or admit that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html

[bossy22]

132. so it would be better

if all those gun homicides were knife homicides. The weapon that is used should not matter and you keep referring to correlations as causations

[pipoman]

136. So you admit that you don't really care if overall homicide rates

fall or raise you are only concerned about "gun homicide"? You still haven't addressed the fact that per capita homicide rats have been dropping for a decade with more and more guns in circulation every year. And don't forget who childishly drags this conversation to name calling...it wasn't me.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/hmrt.htm

[smoogatz]

144. Woo hoo!

Now it's only four to eight times the murder rate of other developed nations! I guess we can all relax now. There are other causal factors, obviously (economics, drugs, etc.), but if you take an honest look at gun ownership and homicide across a range of countries economically similar to the U.S., you can't seriously maintain that guns play no role in the overall homicide rate. In the U.S. the numbers are particularly stark, as you now know.

[bossy22]

146. i dont think anyone will argue

that guns dont play a role in gun crime, but i think you seriously overestimate their effect. in the 1990's over 75 million guns entered civilian hands but gun crime went down. I think socioeconomic factors are the biggest factors. our best gun crime fighting tool is still education.

[pipoman]

147. Any stats or just more gut feelings?

Again, the homicide rate in the US has always been higher than in the other nations you reference, even when those same nations had similar gun laws and availability as the US, their bans have had little to no effect at all on their overall homicide rates. Maybe because of our more ethnically mixed society, maybe because of economic factors, maybe because of a higher level of freedom and personal responsibility, maybe because of draconian attempts to bend human nature into unrealistic moral balloon sculptures (war on drugs,war on prostitution, war on homosexuality, etc.) but damned little to do with gun laws beyond what we already have or gun availability. Your entire argument that more guns=more homicide is demonstrably erroneous.

[smoogatz]

153. Lordy.

Similar gun laws and availability don't equal similar gun ownership. Please provide links that show similar rates of gun infiltration in the UK historically to what we now experience in the U.S. (i.e., one gun more-or-less for every adult man and woman in the country, two per household). Also, please explain why the U.S.—an economic powerhouse by any standard—has a higher homicide rate than all these countries:

Albania
Uruguay
Peru
Philippines
Côte d'Ivoire
Palestine
Yemen
Turkey
Nepal
Bulgaria
Switzerland
Iran
Bolivia
Finland
Dominica
Israel
Scotland
Mauritius
Armenia
Northern Ireland
Azerbaijan
Sweden
Romania
Malaysia
Republic of Macedonia
Slovakia
Czech Republic
South Korea
Hungary
United Kingdom
Canada
Croatia
Portugal
Malta
Chile
Cyprus
Poland
France
England, Wales
Bermuda
Belgium
Slovenia
Algeria
Brunei
New Zealand
Australia
Maldives
Spain
Italy
Tunisia
Syria
Indonesia
Iceland
Kuwait
Germany
Bahrain
Netherlands
Saudi Arabia
Ireland
Luxembourg
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Greece
United Arab Emirates
Hong Kong
Oman
Japan
Singapore
Morocco
Burma

[bossy22]

155. distribution of wealth

who knows. For one thing id like to know the median murder rate for the US rather than the Average- the average can lie sometimes. Most of america has very low homicide rates, there are pockets of extremely high rates that throw off the average.

we've always had high rates of gun ownership in this country.

but to answer your question simply, probably a multitude of other factors- maybe the way they calculate homicide, or maybe the way the government deals with crime....or falsifying statistics.

[pipoman]

204. That is the $49,000 question

Also, please explain why the U.S.—an economic powerhouse by any standard—has a higher homicide rate than all these countries:

But to claim it is because of gun ownership is silly, you wish it was that simple. If it were D.C., N.Y., Chicago, Cali, would be panaceas of crime free living. There are doubtless many reasons mostly socio-economic, war on drugs and education related, it's not my job to determine all of the causes for higher crime in the US.

Please provide links that show similar rates of gun infiltration in the UK historically to what we now experience in the U.S.

I am not your google machine. You have not shown why it matters. I have shown that even with increasing numbers of firearms in the US homicide rates have been falling for a decade, your assertion that more guns=more crime is wrong.

[bossy22]

135. smoogatz

check out my post titled "here it is" it looks at homicide rates from the 1980's-1990's, a semi-auto ban was in place in 1987, and a handgun ban in 1986, murder rates did not change much, in fact they actually increased a little, but i count that as insignificant fluctuation

[boilinmad]

143. Its nice to see...

....that they're enjoying the products we sell them. GUNS FUCKING SUCK, and in a perfect world, there would be none around, so there would be none to regulate. All the gun lovers would have to channel their obsession to something a bit more productive, and, a bit more civilized. Also, whenever i SERIOUSLY ask, "What gun would Jesus own?" , the response is a picture of Jesus with some monstrous gun. Funny, huh. Answer the question. The reason the question is asked in the first place, is that guns and Christian religion go hand in hand, same group, and it seems that the absurdity of it all should be crammed down their throat constantly. Did i say that GUNS FUCKING SUCK?

[bossy22]

145. who the hell are you

to determine what is productive to society and what is not. you can hate guns, its your right, and its not my place to say you are wrong, but to start spouting that BS about "obsession and duty to society" is just childish and niave. First off if you want to talk about productiveness to society, up here in rural america hunters provide a valuable service, they control the deer population here. Not only to protect the ecosystem balance, but to protect the people. do you know how many people get injured or killed because of hitting a deer- hundreds in just this small little area of the southern tier. also did you ever think that the jesus picture was a joke.

And by attempting to demonize the people who enjoy it (recreational shooters, hunters, collectors) you some how feel morally superior. Express your oppinion all you want- i will fight for your right to do that, but dont try to seat yourself on your high-horse; you may fall off it one day

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Paladin]

151. Thanks For Elevating The Level Of Discourse (n/t)

[karlrschneider]

171. Precisely what I did.

...

[Edweird]

179. uh, they're not safe now because of w, not because people there own guns...

[bossy22]

130. all you see

is a correlation- look at the crime rates and murder rates of england before teh 1987 semi-auto ban and the 1996 handgun ban, they dont really change excpet for a slight increase in murder....

[smoogatz]

131. link please.

While you're looking, chew on this:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html

[bossy22]

133. here you go

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-056.pdf

that shows murder rates for 1980-1990's. 1987 a semi auto ban was put in place and murder rates didnt change

[smoogatz]

140. From your PDF:

"In 1997 around 8% of homicides involved firearms and almost one third a sharp weapon.
Firearm use in homicide has fallen over the past few years, in common with firearm use in
other offences."

D'oh!

The murder rate in the US has averaged around 5.7 per 100,000 over the last several years. England's is 1.6 or so--about 28% of ours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homicide_rate#2000s

Care to try again?

[bossy22]

141. you dont get it

overall homicide increased- if you had no gun homicide, but 50,000 knife murders, would that mean that its safer?

[smoogatz]

154. The UK has so few homicides that a single anomalous incident--like the

2006 bombings or the 1996 Dunblane massacre--can skew the numbers to the high side. Let's give it a few years and see what happens.

I'd personally rather face a knife-wielding maniac than a crazy with a gun. Wouldn't you?

[bossy22]

157. and you prove my point

the homicide rate doesnt seem to be greatly affected by gun control, but has been higher than its late 1980's. Give it a few years?, its been given 20 and 11 years respectively. The fact is that up until the early 2000's there was no such thing as an armed patrol around city streets in the UK, now its not uncommon to see regular bobbies carrying sidearms.

Would i rather face a knife wielding maniac than a crazy with a gun, well it depends- a knife wound is more deadly than a gun shot in many cases (gun shots leave clean wounds while knife wounds turn your insides into what comes out of a meat grinder). Also i find that question a little perplexing because the fact that the overwhelming majority of criminal encounters are commited with no involvement of firearms.

The problem with gun violence isnt the random mass shooting- infact that sad fact is that mass shootings actually contribute almost insignificantly to the overall murder rate. Most of the shootings are criminal on criminal crime aka gang gun homicide (the fact is i dont really mind them shooting each other up at sometimes, as long as no innocent bystanders get shot).

We can bring gun crime under control without gun control, it just doesnt make as good a soundbite for our elected officials. Better education may not be a quick fix, but in the long run it will make us safer and not infringe on the rights of ordinary americans.

btw dont forget about the Hungerford Massacre committed by Michael Ryan with an AK-47 and an M1 Carbine in 1987

edit for spelling

[smoogatz]

170. The homicide rate wasn't greatly affected because the number of guns

involved was relatively small. The aim of England's recent gun legislation was not necessarily to reduce the overall homicide rate (which was already quite low and involved very few gun deaths), but to prevent further massacres of the Hungerford/Dunblane variety. It's also worth noting that "In 2005/06 there were 766 offences initially recorded as homicide by the police in England and Wales (including the 52 victims of the 7 July 2005 London bombings),<17> a rate of 1.4 per 100,000 of population. Only 50 (6.6%) were committed with firearms, one being with an air weapon."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

So, even with the London bombings, a decrease compared to previous years.

Compare that with the 5.5 (or so) rate in the U.S., and our 7,000+ gun homicides every year.

I would argue that gun control does not infringe on anybody's rights.

[bossy22]

181. it depends

on what level of control it is. if you are talking about background checks, i agree, licensing and registration- thats a grey area- bans i think are unconstitutional

btw dunblane could have been prevented if some idiot chief had actually been doing his job. The FLO (Firearm Liason Officer- the one who is incharge of handling all aplications and subsequent investigations) that handled Thomas Hamilton's case suggested to the chief of the police (who is the one who signs off on any gun license) that Mr. Hamilton not be issued a License due to prior mental history. The Chief subsequently ignored the FLO's reccomendation and signed off on teh license and so the dunblane massacre killed. Sadly this is alot like what happened in the VT shooting

[smoogatz]

184. I think all gun owners should be required to serve one weekend a month

in the national guard, per the constitution. Failing that, gun ownership should be restricted entirely to weapons available in 1787.

Okay, seriously? Mandatory gun safety training, licensing and registration, and a ban on the sale and import of handguns. You can own them, but you can't sell them.

[bossy22]

189. here i go

mandatory safety training- i like the idea of safety training, but i find this is unnesscary because gun accidents are very very rare in the grand scheme of things (despite what the media tells you).

Licensing and registration- well registration i believe is a waste of money (see my other post under the SWISS sub post) with questionalbe results (canadient gun registry). Licensing i believe is an infringement if there is a clause that requires you to show a reason. I wouldnt be die hard against a licensing scheme which was only there to make sure that prohibited persons could not own a gun, but one where i have to show "good reason" for owning one is unconstitutional in my mind.
also, a licensing scheme will cost alot of money and police resources that will have to be taken away from actually fighting crime and put towards paperwork. Not to mention it will only give a bit more control than our current background check scheme. If you just put some money into the NICS system the system would be much more effective- this would save time and money and is less annoying than a licensing scheme

Ban on handguns- this is just silly, ban handguns and the criminals will still have them or they will start using a sawed off shotgun, which happends to be extremely effective. The reason handguns are very prevalent in gun crime is mainly due to the fact of supply. Handguns are by far more easy to steal then shotguns and when they started becoming more prevalent, more of them started showing up in criminals hands. But then again it isnt that hard to steal a shotgun so it wont change much. Also handguns are the best self-defense firearm you can have, thats why police carry them. not to mention that the majority of america thinks handguns should be legal to buy, sell, and own.

[Pavulon]

196. Did we ban the sale of alcohol and heroin

seems people still bought and sold them..

The problem is cultural. So other than massive handgun sales by legal purchasers before this party killing law, what do you think the outcome would be?

Now I met some smart people in the guard, I also meet some dumb fucks. Like should not have a pocket knife dumb. Just because someone is a member of of the armed forces has no bearing on their ability to own firearms.

BTW a sawed off pump shotgun is FAR deadlier than a handgun. Ban handguns and the assholes who are not smart enough to find one of the millions of black market weapons created by a law like that, would just adopt and use shotguns.

My idea. Enforce ALL firearms related crimes equivalent to NFA violations. 10 year mandatory sentence. Ever wonder why you do not see lots of machine guns used in crimes. The penalty for possession is greater than most people get once they plea their murder down to man 2.

[bossy22]

142. lets also play a little more

check out englands homicide rate back in the 1950's when our gun controls were about the same, you could carry a handgun almost anywhere in england at that time

[bossy22]

139. and if you type in

Homicide rates by country in wikipedia you get a nice filled out chart that goes through the years. I know wiki isnt a scientific source but there information was references all seemed credible (alot of .gov)

[superconnected]

111. How would we know, the US doesn't have real gun control.

Most of the citizens who want arms have them. Of course we'd have a whole lot more gun deaths every year if everyone had them. That's from the gun freaks' kids getting ahold of them and shooting their siblings statistics alone.

[pipoman]

120. What does this mean?

"That's from the gun freaks' kids getting ahold of them and shooting their siblings statistics alone."

not very cogent.

[superconnected]

121. Throw in a comma after, "siblings". I didn't edit for punctuation because

I assumed most people could understand what it said.

[pipoman]

125. Of what statistics do you speak, link?

[Pavulon]

158. I want a colt M4

I want to pay $800 for that weapon, same as the feds. But because of GUN CONTROL if I want an M4 I have to pay 20,000 for a pre 86 weapon.

If I want a G36 or P90 I can not have one. They are illegal to own.

Ban swimming pools, they kill more kids.

300 people will die in car accidents. Most of those are not accidental, they are people doing dumb or illegal shit killing other people.

Many people will OD on ILLEGAL, Banned drugs. Because BANS do not work.

[bossy22]

160. home swimming pools

kill more true kids a year than guns do. and i say true kids because the gun control movements likes to count anyone and everyone up until the age of 28 as a kid. I dont think you would consider a 28 year old a kid

[LanternWaste]

172. Or, maybe in the last moments of their lives,

Or, maybe in the last moments of their lives, they had wished the perpetrator didn't have one...

[bossy22]

182. since it was most likely a robbery

the gun probably wasnt bought at a gun store and then used to commit the robbery. IT was either stolen, home made or imported through the black market. Gun control would have very little effect on this situation. Unlike a random mass shooting where a once sane normal person who has a clean record, goes nuts, this cases its a convicted felon, out of jail, botches a robbery.

[LanternWaste]

202. I'm afraid I don't see how your statement precludes

I'm afraid I don't see how your statement precludes the victim's possible last wish that the perpetrators did not indeed have a firearm.

But I do see that instances like this one simply allows both sides of the gun debates to simply dig their heels in more and maintain a rigid dogma rather than actually focusing on the most important aspect of this scenario-- people are dead.

[bossy22]

55. gun free zones

do nothing, its all symbolic

[LanternWaste]

203. Absolutely gun don't kill people--

Absolutely gun don't kill people-- it's the bullets that actually turn tissue, bone and muscle into hambuger....

[villager]

4. As long as the shooter's *second amendment rights* (NRA Version) were in no way impinged

...who cares about the victims or their families?

Maybe we'll lock up the shooter after the fact, though. Cause you know, us gun people have to pretend to be against this sort of thing.

(Thought I'd condense the coming ammophile apologias in advance...)

[Endangered Specie]

6. Whats funny is you claim to carea bout the victims and families...

but you cannot wait for the blood to dry before bringing up the gun debate...

Perhaps both sides can agree on, say, a 24 hours truce before that particular debate begins?

[villager]

14. sorry -- had your fellow ammophiles accuse me of lying when I mentioned a student's

personal loss to gun violence in another thread, so I'm a little sick of the callousness, and the self-righteousness of you people...

Not only couldn't they wait, they were busy denying someone's pain and loss for their own ideological reasons...

[Edweird]

12. "Cause you know, us gun people have to pretend to be against this sort of thing."

You believe that there are gun owners out there that are happy about this?
What a sad twisted world you must live in.
Get help.

[villager]

15. Gun folk are glad to say the shooter should be in jail *after the fact*

They offer *zero* ideas -- in fact, retreat into defensiveness, or snide asshole comments instead -- on how to prevent such things.

Surprise me, instead of doing the all-too-typical snarking: Tell me how we *prevent* gun violence, and not clean up after the fact.

It's not just me who needs "help" in gun-ridden America, compadre.

[bossy22]

18. first off

lets wait until we get the details, for all we know this guy could have assaulted a cop, stole his gun, and ran into the store shooting...we dont know how he got the gun or guns so arguing about how to prevent this is sort of nothing more than guessing.

[villager]

20. quit equivocating -- it's sickening: Surprise me instead: How do we *prevent* gun violence

Go on: I'm listening.

[bossy22]

21. This would be a discussion for the gungeon

if you want to have a debate, create a post on the gungeon and i shall respond but i do not want to start a very very long debate on this thread.

[villager]

23. you want to snark, but you don't want to debate?

Figures.

[bossy22]

26. if you want to debate how this shooting could be

prevented, i will do it here, only after i have the facts. if you want to discuss prevention of overall gun violence, this is not the thread

[villager]

28. right -- this has nothing to do with overall gun violence. Right.

Nice dodge.

[bossy22]

32. start a post right now

and i will respond

[Pavulon]

29. The same way you prevent OD from Heroin

ban it...Mandatory minimums..Oh wait.

The swiss have access to real machine guns and dont go killing each other.

It is a mix between socio economic factors and societal influence. (easy fix)

[villager]

31. uh, generally the way it's prevented is when it's controlled and regulated by the government

Glad to see you at the grown-up's table!

[Pavulon]

33. Coke and Oxy too..

Bans tend to be less than effective. For example there is a gun BAN in Chicago. Firearms are controlled and regulated by the government.

BTW about 300 people died in car accidents. Most were not accidents but people doing illegal or stupid things that killed another person.

[villager]

198. so you're in favor of an unregulated drug industry, too!

Figures.

[Pavulon]

199. Firearms are regulated, want proof?

Cut the barrel off the end of a shotgun. Take it to a police station or try to sell it. Say good by to friends and family for 10 years. Enjoy federal prison. First try, no negotiations, no plea, you just go away.

People buy and sell ILLEGAL drugs. They buy and sell all kinds of things. The penalty tends to influence the act. If every firearm related crime tacked on 10 year minimum to the other charge (robbery for example) the problem would be greatly reduced.

Socio economic AND culture problem.

[villager]

200. Tacking a 10 year minimum, after the carnage, is of little comfort

to the victims' families.

You gun strokers absolutely refuse to acknowledge that. If you want proof, take a little trip to the Chicago suburbs this weekend.

Further, guns aren't regulated to nearly the degree cars are. You know, and your example was a disingenous one.

[Pavulon]

201. You think this peckerwood

just committed his first crime? No like a DRUNK DRIVER who gets caught, he has been pulling crimes and just graduated to murder.

300 people die a DAY in cars. Mostly because some jerk broke the law. I was not looking does not make a failure to yield a legal act. True accidents are rare. So even in a regulated environment cars kill tens of thousands more than criminals with firearms.

Firearms are highly regulated by both state and the federal governments.

What do you propose? How do you stop this. You going to ban guns. Just like we banned booze and narcotics?

It DOES NOT WORK. There is a cultural problem here that must be addressed.

[villager]

213. You're the one who thinks the current flow of firearms is just fine. What do *you* propose

to keep guns out of the hands of peckerwoods?

What?

Do you

Propose?

[Pavulon]

214. As I said

enforcing common sense laws on the books and making use of a firearm in a crime, any crime, a aggravating factor that enhances a sentence.

The NFA works because it has teeth.

[villager]

217. the typical circle: Sure, shooting someone's a crime. How do you keep

...the guns out of the hands of shooters?

Not perfectly (anticipating your next reply) -- but drastically reducing the current flow of guns and ammo to our streets.

I am waiting for your ideas.

And please quit relying on the vagaries and generalities they feed you at gun apologetics school: Come up with some specifics.

[Edweird]

208. "Further, guns aren't regulated to nearly the degree cars are"

You're kidding, right?
That has got to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

[villager]

216. Edweird, instead of ad hominum, AM-radio style attempted zingers,

why not come up with an occasional fact?

[Edweird]

223. well, then, here you go.

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/27cfr478_03.html
Code of federal regs. for firearms.
I couldn't find one for personal automobile ownership.

edited to add:

How 'bout you backing up your assertion first.

[Edweird]

224. Here are a few points:

There are no background checks or waiting periods to purchase automobiles.

Even though the laws says no one under 16 can pump gas (in Florida anyway) , you can send your 12 year old in to buy the gas and pump it. No one will say anything.
Try that at your local gunstore. Send your 12 year old in to buy some ammo. But, take a stop watch. I'm curious about how long it would take before the police yank you out of your car and arrest you.

You can walk into a car dealership and proudly proclaim "I'm buying a car for my friend".
Try that at a gunstore.

You can modify your car in just about any way you want. Egregious violations are usually just a ticket. Sometimes a car gets impounded.
Make the wrong modification to your firearm and you're in Federal prison for 10 years. No plea bargain. No time off for good behavior.

These are just a few points off the top of my head. More to come later.

[derby378]

45. Actually, the Swiss only have access to semi-autos

Only members of the military can keep full-autos at home, so America still has more liberal gun laws than Switzerland overall.

[Edweird]

49. What military would that be?

In Switzerland?

[Pavulon]

50. Hundreds of thousands of reservists have ready access

to fully automatic weapons. Around 20% of houses contain a machine gun. This is the same as every guardsman in the US retaining his service weapon (m16/m4) and loaded magazines at home. Not a replica like you can buy here but a sig55x select fire rifle.

The difference is as stated. Socio-economic and cultural.

[derby378]

53. Reservists are still military, though

In the meantime, I can still own any select-fire weapon made before 1986 without ever setting foot in a recruiter's office. Of course, there's the security check, the transfer fee, the 60-day waiting period, and the prohibitive cost of many legal full-auto weapons in America, but...

[Pavulon]

61. Yes you can own an NFA

regulated weapon. There is almost no crime (like one or two events in 70 years) committed with NFA weapons.

My point is that 20% of homes have machine guns. But for some reason the swiss manage not to shoot each other on a routine basis.

[tabasco]

77. The Swiss have rigorous hand gun control.

How do you feel about that?

[Pavulon]

101. But a guardsman can keep his sig550

in his closet. Let you brain wrap around that one. Hundreds of thousands of evil black rifles. Yet they manage not to machine Gun each other, how?

[tabasco]

106. I don't think rifles are evil.

I'm a former Airborne Ranger.

Why would you think that?

Hand guns are used in crime much, much more than rifles.

I really have no use for a pistol. We didn't use them in the infantry either. I'm in favor of stringent hand gun control but I don't really care about hunting rifles or shotguns. Strict hand gun control seems to reduce gun crime pretty well in Europe.

[bossy22]

128. strict handgun control probably has

very little to do with it, since the pre-strict control crime rates are about the same was the post control crime rates

[Pavulon]

166. Controls are in place

I would bet on several things here:

The person who did this has a criminal record.
The weapon used was not registered in his name.
The person was committing a crime by possessing a weapon.

I have no problem with handgun control. Reasonable laws exist. However they are not enforced. If the law treated the above the same as possessing a sawed off shotgun this would slow down. As these people would be doing ten year mandatory stretches.

If all handguns were banned they would use other weapons. A sawed off shotgun is actually more deadly than anything else these morons could get. Almost anyone can pick up a shotgun and hit a target moving or standing still. Not so with a rifle.

My point is that there is a social difference here that makes possession of a service rifle normal in switzerland and absurd here.

This is social and culturally driven.

[tabasco]

188. If there are laws on the books that are not being enforced,

then there are not controls in place.

Words on a piece of paper don't do a thing.

[bossy22]

192. so lets

start enforcing them. Ive been saying this (along with almost all gun owners i know) lets start enforcing these laws. Make carrying a fiream without a license a serious offense.

[Pavulon]

197. The NFA is effective because it is enforced..

Because some jurisdictions choose not to prosecute firearm offenses does not mean the law is not there.

Making new stupid laws does not address the root cause. I joke that I was stuck with armed angry men for a year and never felt safer.

There is a cultural problem at work. I had my ass kicked and on occasion beat back, but never felt the urge to shoot someone. Did not worry about being stabbed, etc. I mean guys were screwing around with other guys women, but no one ever just shot someone.

The morons running around who do are the problem. These bastards have something to prove.

Adherence to firearm laws is not top on their agenda.

I bet this guy had something on his jacket that should have him behind bars. This was probably not his first criminal act.

[benEzra]

165. Not as rigorous as you probably think.

Pretty much any Swiss citizen with a clean record can own a handgun, just as in the United States, AFAIK.

[Edweird]

34. First off: this happened in a GUN FREE ZONE, in a heavily REGULATED area.

How you can suggest that gun owners are somehow required to come up with a "solution" to this is baffling.
The anti-gun groups got what they wanted: no law abiding gun owners around.
And now it's somehow the gun owners responsibility?
What kind of math are you doing?

More laws will not stop ANYBODY that is willing to break them.

Furthermore, I take great offense at your suggestion that gun owners WANT this kind of tragedy.
I, for one, do not.
As a matter of fact, these types of criminals are EXACTLY why I have a concealed weapons permit in the first place.

"Gun control" does not work.
We need "criminal control".

[bossy22]

36. ill also add

for the hundredth time that we dont who this guy is or how he got his weapons

[krispos42]

46. I don't give a crap about stopping "gun" violence

I care about stopping violence as a whole. The usual array of Brady-campaign measures don't stop violence as a whole, they merely attempt to stop one tool of violence from being used. And since the law-abiding are affected by such laws first and foremost, they aren't even taking guns away from the real source of the problem: violent criminals with guns.

[Edweird]

48. Here is how you prevent gun violence:

By dealing with the root causes of ALL violence.
Real care for the mentally ill. Domestic violence/anger management counseling. Real help with child abuse.
Inanimate objects (ie: guns and the teevee) are not causing this. People are.
I grew up in Memphis. Everybody I knew had guns. My grandparents had enough guns to arm a small country. Most of my friends had a .38 or .45 by 16. There were no "columbine" events. What changed? Not the guns. Not tv. The people changed.

Look at the UK. They totally banned guns. People still get shot. Murders still increased. They are now talking about regulating KNIVES for crying out loud. Where is the improvement?

How about Canada? Armed gangs wearing bulletproof vests driving armored SUV's with lights and sirens around British Columbia terrorizing an unarmed and defenseless populace. Not good.

Prison! No guns OR knives, yet people are raped, murdered, and robbed daily.

The problem isn't the guns.
The problem is the people.

Deal with the people, and the violence will end.

[derby378]

51. Bingo!

Liberal America needs to get over its love affair with gun control. Outlawing guns won't bring JFK or Martin Luther King back.

[bossy22]

59. but that doesnt work well for soundbites

[Edweird]

65. Yeah, well, they can soundbite my ass!

:P

I believe our government has a responsibility to care for its citizens first and foremost.
They have failed in a big way.

[pipoman]

71. I agree with your post

I would point out that while there is a definite prohibition against weapons and drugs in prisons, it is a fact that there are still weapons and drugs in the most secure Federal Prisons in the US. The prohibition, while it keeps the honest criminals from possessing those prohibited items, the others definitely have them.

My question is if it has been demonstrated that we cannot keep weapons and drugs out of the most secure facilities in the US how in the hell are we going to rid a free society of these things?

Prohibitions don't work, never have, never will..

[Paladin]

78. Anyone Who Doesn't Have Their Head Up Their Ass.....

...would swap our gun murder rate with that of the UK or Canada in a heartbeat.

And as for that dealing with the root causes argument you make, that's nothing more than a gun activist smokescreen, used time and time again lately. Just where the hell are we supposed to get the trillions of dollars to fight those root causes? And maybe more importantly, where do we summon up the public and political will to collect those trillions of dollars and spend them where they'll do the most good?
Meanwhile, the endless supply of guns in this country lethally impinges on all those societal problems you're expressing such concern about; it's like dumping gas on a forest fire.

How many shopping malls were turned into slaughterhouses in the UK or Canada today? And how many future slaughters in this country will you accept as a reasonable trade-off for your unfettered access to firearms?

[Edweird]

85. Uh, gun activist smokescreen?

Whatever.
I'm speaking from my own observations, whether you like it or not. There's no agenda, only me calling it the way I see it.
And yes, I grew up around them, and no nobody that I'm aware ever shot anybody.
So my own life experience has taught me that the guns aren't the problem.
And anybody that doesn't have their head firmly planted in their ass can see that.

[Paladin]

91. You Know, Growing Up With Guns.....

...and owning guns doesn't dictate that one has to buy into the gun militancy mantra. I'm living proof of that. And guns most certainly are the problem in this country: confrontations that never get beyond shouting matches in Oslo, Norway or fist fights in Perth, Australia end up as shooting fatalities here in the U.S. The emergency rooms of one major U.S. city clock more firearms deaths in one weekend than most advanced countries do in a whole year. This is a direct consequence of a gigantic tide of easily-available guns washing over a great quantity of societal problems. That is an undeniable fact; you're either on the side of doing something proactive about it, or you're not. I'm comfortable where I am.....

[Edweird]

93. What "gun militancy mantra"?

Remember my "gun activist smokescreen"?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2808879
That is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. This has been going on for a long time.

I agree that there are societal problems. Where we differ is the root cause.
I do not believe that ANY inanimate object ever maliciously killed anybody.
Chainsaw, handgun, pipe bomb, truck bomb, nuclear bomb, nerve agent, whatever, there was a human behind it.
I feel that to stop the killing, we need to address WHY not HOW. The guns are merely a tool of convenience.
At least you understand, unlike my Australian friend, that our culture is different than others.

[Paladin]

116. Nobody Believes That Inanimate Objects Kill Anybody.

Nobody, not even the most radical gun opponents, far more radical than I am. When someone says we have a "gun problem" in this country, it's appropriate shorthand for having a problem with guns being utilized by people in an an inappropriate way, and it ought to be understood as such. This notion that gun control advocates think that guns get up and shoot all by themselves is part of the dumbing down of the argument that the gun rights movement has been so successful at over the years. You got it right: guns are "a tool of convenience," and we've conveniently established an obscene number of gun deaths (and by that I don't mean that guns have died, or that guns themselves have killed anybody, I mean that people wielding guns have killed other people) in this country....

[Edweird]

176. ok. I'm in total agreement. now for the hard part...

If you catch your 14 year old daughter cutting herself with X-acto knives, what do you do?
Do you simply take away her kit and call it a success?
No.
You get her help. The knives are a tool and the cutting is a symptom of a serious problem.
Simply banning knives will only make things worse in the long run.

Our country is ill.
There are deep seeded problems that are not getting better, and are being ignored.
The symptoms include the violence. One of the tools are firearms.

Simply "controlling" firearms doesn't address one issue. It fixes nothing.
It is a politically expedient way to pretend that something has been "accomplished", when in fact the illness expands unabated.

Again:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2808879
http://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.004/thomas.html

[Paladin]

187. I Believe We'll Just Have To Disagree On This

Thanks for the thoughtful exchange.....

[Irreverend IX]

100. Trillions of dollars?

Legalizing drugs won't cost the government anything (quite the opposite, in fact) and will remove the single greatest cause of violent crime in the US today.

[Paladin]

118. See My Comment About Public And Political Will (n/t)

[Edweird]

69. Also, show me these gun people that want him "jailed after the fact"

The point of self defense is living to tell about it. "After the fact" means you're dead.
I would rather see the threat terminated prior to anyone getting hurt.

[bluestateguy]

17. Shameless

You just couldn't wait until the blood was mopped off of the floor before making political hay out of this event.

[villager]

22. And you can't wait to start apologizing for the NRA's "let a thousand guns bloom" position!

People race here to exclaim guns should never be implicated in gun crimes.

Those are the shameless ones.

[bossy22]

24. what does the NRA have to do with this

we know very little about what happened

[villager]

25. aren't you the guy that doesn't want to debate?

You might want to make up your mind.

[bossy22]

ohh i love debating

but i dont think that this is the forum to debate preventing gun violence overall, i would agree to debating how to prevent this shooting in particular in this forum once i know the facts

[bossy22]

27. ohh i love debating

but i dont think that this is the forum to debate preventing gun violence overall, i would agree to debating how to prevent this shooting in particular in this forum once i know the facts

[villager]

30. Evidently!

Kinda.

As it turns out.

though it's beginning to feel more like the Monty Python's Argument Clinic.

[bossy22]

37. debating

without knowing the facts is just like playing pin the tale on the donkey

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bossy22]

57. you are mistaken

i do not know who you are talking about, but since my name is also a common word it would not be surprising that someone mistook me. I chose this name AND NUMBER, because it is the name and number of my favorite sports icon of all time- Mike Bossy of the New York Islanders Dynasty team of the late 1970's and early 1980's.

[krispos42]

39. Leaping in without facts, are we?

Nothing is known, yet you're sprouting off already.

But I forget, you want to live in a world where there are no concentrated massacres of people, and to achieve that goal you're willing to have a significantly higher homicide rate. After all, it's not the number of people per year that are killed that upset you, it's how many die in one chunk.

:eyes:

[pipoman]

40. If anyone it is you who LOVES to hear of high profile gun murders

it makes your day. It helps you and your repug friends over at brady make anecdotal claims of guns being the cause of all of the ills of society. It helps you make a case based on flawed, failed logic for advancement of your position. You love to hear of these types of incidents and I for one am sick of your crocodile tears every time a crazy criminal illegally in possession of an illegal gun goes whack job and you equivocating that to the law abiding to further your 1990's failed political agenda on this party.

[Endangered Specie]

7. The gunman wasn't found... pretty unusual

how'd they *not* notice him/her leaving? Usually they just off themselves when the police come

[knitter4democracy]

80. The strip mall's right by an exit to I-80, from what I read.

They looked through the rest of the mall and the area, but chances are, he just got back on the freeway.

[ladywnch]

8. if only some of the customers or associates in thes store had guns

they could have stopped all this by simply killing the gunman. We should all carry guns for just this reason just like the NRA and Charleton Heston suggest.


:sarcasm:

[Paladin]

9. I Wish Your Comment Could Be Confined To Sarcasm

But there's already a post on this thread, whining about "gun free zones." And I'm sure that similar posts are on the way.

These people won't be happy until everybody is carrying guns, and the law of the jungle is in full play in this country....

[east texas lib]

10. It always has been the law of the jungle out there...

And the prey have always been the unarmed.

[skater314159]

44. Ping!

But now I'm armed!

[east texas lib]

56. Nice little kitty now...

The Felinator!

[Paladin]

74. The Law Of The Jungle May Reign To Some Extent

But that doesn't mean you should revel in it. Or oppose measures to put civilized behavior in place. And that's exactly the sort of attitude that the gun rights movement overtly displays. As always, there is ample, daily proof of this in our very own DU Gun Dungeon.....

[east texas lib]

89. That's correct, you shoudn't revel in it. And so I do not.

I have, however, accepted the harsh reality that there will always be people who will
maim, kill, rob others for profit or just the cornbread hell of it. And so I have taken
the appropriate steps to prepare for that unwellcome eventuality. Situational awareness
and competency in the carry and use of a firearm will give you a fighting chance for
survival, nothing more and nothing less. As for the civilized measures of which you
speak, I'm sure there were several measures disregarded by the murderous prick who
killed those people whose only mistake was to think that they carry on their daily
affairs unmolested. They were all very civilized, and now they're all very dead.
Arm yourself. Defend yourself and your loved ones.

[davepc]

11. well it would of been nice if somebody could of shot back at him

Cook County is one of the hardest places to legally own a firearm in the United States.

Guess the shooter didnt get the memo.

[Pavulon]

13. Like the guy who planned a mass murder at church..

seems being shot interrupted his agenda a bit. Maybe he had hundreds of rounds just for a workout. Wanted to carry all that ammo around.

[bossy22]

19. actually

the NRA advocates you having the choice too, not arming everyone. Anyone could see that arming everyone is a bad idea.

[krispos42]

47. Perhaps the opposite would work, then.

Oh, wait...

:eyes:

[pipoman]

62. The only people I ever hear this

"We should all carry guns for just this reason just like the NRA and Charleton Heston suggest."

from are people who want to amend the bill of rights to remove the second amendment and then send the government agents door to door to search and seize guns. Those are the only people who ever say this.

I hate to defend the NRA (of which I am not a member) but can you point me to anything on their website that backs up this claim (them wanting to arm everyone or advocating such a position)? Anything? I didn't think so. Can you point me to a post by anyone on this forum who advocates "everyone carrying guns"? I didn't think so. Why not stick to the facts, why must you lie to try to push your political agenda the same day this tragedy occurred?

[superconnected]

113. Maybe because gun freaks are already stating on this thread that

these women probably wished they were armed. Sorry, most womens answer to violence isn't wish I could kill the person, it's wish I could get away.

[pipoman]

122. There have definitely ben statements from both sides of this issue which are

over the top in this thread. In states which have concealed carry (remember in the last 20 years the voters of 44 states have adopted laws allowing law abiding citizens to carry a firearm for personal protection) 1/4 to 1/3 of CCW holders are women. I personally know women ranging in age between mid 20's and 70 who have ccw permits and are proficient in the use of their firearms. Once again you try to inject the fallacy of your own erroneous assertions into this conversation. Not all women are meek little mice looking for a blanket to hide under when confronted with danger, case in point the Colorado church shootings a month or so ago.

[bossy22]

16. this is a horrible tragedy

and my sympathies are with the victims and their families. We should not have the gun debate until we know the facts because right now we know nothing

[rsmith6621]

41. Update.. 5 shot dead at suburban Chicago store

Source: MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press Writer





SAD......

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/store_shooting

[AlCzervik]

42. and the gunman is still on the loose, how sad.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alcibiades_mystery]

58. South Side

Might as well be Argentina for all the contact we have with it up here...

[bossy22]

67. the shooting

self delete

[Oldtimeralso]

90. This is not a "Gun Free Zone"

nor is it in Chicago or even Cook County. Anyone from the area knows that Chicago is not a "Gun Free Zone" it does restrict the sale of hand guns in the city. This store is approx. 25 mile South and 10 miles west of downtown Chicago.

[ohio2007]

108. ..and this "gun slinger" SHOULDN'T get the DEATH penality because ?....

well,
If you start killing killers....wouldn't that set an example ?


-->whoooosh <---

how many heads did that death penality arguement go over ;)

[superconnected]

115. yet another mass murder where the majority of victims are women.

Of course here they are all women instead of just most. Usually it's just most. And yeah, I do keep track.

[McHatin]

174. Erm...

What does that have to do with this thread? And aren't men far more likely to be victims of violent crime? Do you really think this guy robbing a store was also some militant sexist who wanted to kill women?

[RamboLiberal]

210. I don't really buy that his primary thought was robbery

Did he go in with the intent to murder? I think so. He had to know he wasn't going to get much cash from a clothing store.

He took the time to take the women to the rear storeroom. Tie them up and then murder them.

I think either this was a revenge killing against one of the women or this is a spree killer.

Bad sign anytime a robber herds a group of employees/customers to the rear of a store or storeroom - this ususally means murder is a motive.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

211. Uh, it was a women's clothing store...

"Usually it's just most. And yeah, I do keep track."

Really? OK, let's see some numbers.

[raccoon]

219. Hope they catch that bastard. nt

[raccoon]

221. News articles said Lane Bryant didn't have a security camera.

I hope they get one now.